Impeachment witch-hunt: Another day of drivel

The Impeach-Trump=N-Matter-What hearings continued yesterday. Wednesday's TV snorefest supposedly was viewed, at least for a few minutes, by 13,000,000 Americans. (A handful of Canucks may have tuned in as well, since the never-Trumpers at the CBC managed to put the whole thing on their news website as well as their all-news channel.) The number watching yesterday has not been disclosed but is expected to be about 12,900,000 fewer.

Those who had better things to do may have received the impression, watching the (((controlled media))) news recaps, that the big shock of the day was former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch choking up when told that Still-President Trump had said nasty things about her, and was doing so, on Twitter, even as she spoke!

The chief reason for Ms Yovanovitch's appearance seemed to be to give her an opportunity to vent about the shock and dismay she felt when she was fired by President Trump "for no reason". She didn't actually try (as Tucker Carlson had predicated) but did appear terribly, terribly hurt.

Ms Yovanovitch gave no evidence, not even hearsay, about telephone calls made by President Trump to Ukrainian President Zelensky or to other US State Department hacks. Nor did she say anything about "quid pro quo" or "bribery". None of the allegations which the House Intelligence Committee [sic] is supposed to be investigating happened on her watch.

But she did spill the beans about something that happened while she was still Ambassador to the Ukraine, namely the firing of that country's top prosecutor, who, according to Ms Yovanovitch, was investigating the affairs of Burisma Holdings, thereby causing some embarrassment for one of its directors -- Hunter Biden -- and his father, Old Joe Biden, the presidential wannabe.

The HIC asked Ms Yovanovitch about the status of the Ukrainian government's probe into corruption at Burisma when Joe Biden pushed for the ouster of Viktor Shokin, the country’s prosecutor general, in 2016. In response, she admitted that conflicts of interest between the former vice-president and his youngest son were topics of concern for Obama administration officials during her confirmation as ambassador to Ukraine in 2016.

Her admission that Mr Shokin was looking for a "hook" with which to prosecute Burisma and its founder, Mykola Zlocvesky, undermines a central argument Biden père has made to defend his conduct. Since the story became central to the impeachment inquiry, Old Joe and his allies have tried to argue that the investigation into Burisma was dormant at the time of his firing and therefore the ouster of Mr Shokin actually improved the chances that the company would face stricter scrutiny. Besides, that was all done while the Prez was in office, so it was OK... nothing like the kind of meddling in the affairs of a foreign country of which President Trump is accused. Got it?

Not televised for some reason [nudge-nudge, wink-wink. Ed] was the testimony of David Holmes, the aide who claims that, while eating at a restaurant in Kiev, he overheard President Trump talking on the phone with Gordon Sondland, US Ambassador to the European Union. See "Impeachment hearings: a word about hearsay", WWW 15/11/19 (includes video). Mr Trump's end of the conversation must have been difficult for Mr Holmes to hear, but (he says) he clearly overheard Mr Sondland telling President Trump that President Zelensky "loves your ass."

We can only speculate as to whether Mr Sondland was revealing an aspect to the Trump-Zelensky relationship which no-one would ever have suspected. Perhaps Mr Holmes didn't hear a key word. Perhaps Mr Sondland told the President that "Zelensky loves your wife's ass." [Makes more sense to me! Ed.] Or perhaps Mr Sondland was just speaking figuratively.

Other than that, Mr Holmes' testimony added little, serving to confirm only that Mr Trump was indeed interested in Ukraine undertaking "investigations" into 2016 election interference and the circumstances in which former Vice-President Joe Biden forced the ouster of prosecutor Shokin. Mr Holmes' testimony may also have violated rules around classified and privileged communications, but since Donald Trump is the target, that's OK with Adam Schiff and the other Dumbocrats on the HIC.

That's enough drivel for this week. Enjoy your weekend.

Latest dope on the Democrats impeachment inquiry

You're forgiven for wondering if this post is going to be about Adam Schiffty. But he's not the latest dope. Anyway, there's another meaning to the word. "Dope" can mean "information" or, possibly, "news". Since "Media impeachment frenzy continues, Walt waits for real news" (WWW 3/10/19), I haven't written much about the Democrats' impeachment inquiry -- there's no point pretending that this is a bipartisan exercise -- because, frankly, there's not a lot going on, and what there is is pretty thin gruel.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Intelligence [sic] Chairman Adam Schiff have been handing out subpoenas [subpoenae? Ed.] like cookies. Some White House staffers, past and present, have refused to appear. Those who have obeyed the subpoena have had no direct knowledge of what was said in the now infamous telephone call between Still-President Trump and Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky. Their testimony amounts to "My second cousin has a friend who knows somebody in the White House who hinted off the record that..."

That is set to change today when Alexander Vindman, a US Army lieutenant colonel who served in Iraq and, later, as a diplomat, will testify. According to AP, Lt-Col. Vindman will say that he raised concerns, twice, over the Trump administration's push to have the Ukrainian government investigate Old Joe Biden and his sprog Hunter, and the Democrats in general.

What makes Lt-Col. Vindman's testimony potentially more telling is that he will say that he actually listened to President Trump's July 25th telephone conversation with President Zelensky and reported his concerns to the lead counsel of the National Security Council. AP quotes from a copy of his prepared testimony: "I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a US citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the US government's support of Ukraine."

Apparently Lt-Col. Vindman was "concerned" even before he listened in to the inter-presidential phone call. He took Gordon Sondland, the US Ambassador to the European Union, to task follwing a July 10th meeting -- note the date -- in which Ambassador Sondland stressed the importance of having Ukraine investigate the 2016 election as well as Burisma, a company linked to the Biden family. Again according to AP, Lt-Col. Vindman told Ambassador Sondland that "his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push."

So. No pro-Biden or anti-Trump bias there. Nevertheless, the Dumbocrats and the (((controlled media))) are portraying Lt-Col. Vindman as a key witness. However close to the events he may have been, Lt-Col. Vindman is expected to testify that he is not the whistleblower, the still unnamed government official who filed the initial complaint over the telephone conversation that sparked the House impeachment inquiry. Who is the whistleblower? Lt-Col. Vindman will say he doesn't have a clue.

Meanwhile, under pressure to move beyond the first small step towards impeachment (see "How the impeachment process is supposed to work", WWW 24/9/19), Nancy Pelosi announced yesterday that the House will vote on Thursday on a resolution to affirm the impeachment investigation, set rules for public hearings and outline the potential process for writing articles of impeachment. The vote is potentially much more interesting than Lt-Col. Vindman's testimony, because for the first time Congresspersons will have to go on the record as to whether they are in favour of impeaching Still-President Trump. I'll be watching to see which Republicans are "for", and which Democrats are "against". Stay tuned.