May 19, 2024
Democrats line up possible new charges against Trump
“The unwillingness of the Democrats to accept the results of their gross abuse of their constitutional power is a crime against the public trust,” John M. Dowd, Mr. Trump’s former defense counsel, told The Washington Times.
“The unwillingness of the Democrats to accept the results of their gross abuse of their constitutional power is a crime against the public trust,” John M. Dowd, Mr. Trump’s former defense counsel, told The Washington Times.

Democrats already have lined up possible charges if they choose to pursue impeachment 2.0.

Still pending is a wide-open probe launched by Rep. Adam B. Schiff, California Democrat. Mr. Schiff has been investigating President Trump, his family and businesses, the Trump Organization, over the congressman’s suspicions of blackmail, money laundering and bribery.

Republican staffers say the inquiry was put on hold last fall pending the Ukraine impeachment proceedings led by Mr. Schiff. But there is no sign Mr. Schiff has given up trying to prove Mr. Trump is corrupt, and if the president is impeached again, the charges would likely come from this probe, informed sources said.

Mr. Trump alluded to a new impeachment push Thursday.

“So we will probably have to do it again, because these people have gone stone-cold crazy, but I have beaten him all my life and I will beat him again if I have to,” Mr. Trump said at a post-Senate acquittal celebration at the White House. “But what they are doing is very unfair.”

[…]

See Also:

(1) As Impeachment Fails, Romney Stands Alone

(2) Let’s Face It: Joe Biden May Be in Serious Trouble

(3) President Trump publicly apologizes to family. Had no idea at how evil the left was… and what was in store… clip… 2:17

(4) BACKFIRE: ‘I Will Never Vote Democrat Again,’ Say Angry Dems on C-SPAN After Pelosi’s Tantrum

(5) Trump’s Post-Acquittal Presser Did Not Disappoint

Loading

1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gabby in QC
Gabby in QC
February 8, 2020 8:06 am

My comment is in reference to the video posted in the sidebar regarding Vindman & Sondland. According to many reports, including that Fox News video, both were “fired”, making it sound as if both are now out of a job. In fact, as a panelist on another Fox News show (Byron York on Bret Baier’s Special Report ?) stated, LTC Vindman returned to his previous assignment at the Pentagon, so he is not out of a job, as suggested by the term “fired”. His removal from the WH assignment does look like some payback, but he is not now suddenly facing hard times usually associated with joblessness.

As for now former Ambassador Sondland, he too does not all of a sudden find himself out on the street. He is apparently independently wealthy, so being “fired” should be no great hardship for him.

So what’s the big deal? Why my issue with the term “fired”, in particular referring to a man in uniform who said how proud he was to serve his country? Because that so-called firing would be used as absolute more proof of Trump’s vindictiveness. People who get their news by reading only the headlines form opinions based on inaccurate information, which only serves to polarize people even further. Scrupulous adherence to facts is paramount in these troubled times.