Understanding impeachment

The first thing to understand is that the Democrats who are seeking to impeach Trump today for basically not having let Hillary win the 2016 election stood shoulder to shoulder and told the American people that Bill Clinton lying under oath in order to avoid losing a sexual harassment lawsuit was fine.

Here are the things that the Democrats think Trump has done to deserve being impeached:

• Beat Hillary in 2016
• Colluding with Russia even though Mueller said it didn't happen
• Obstructing justice by not admitting he colluded with Russia
• Maybe asking the Ukraine to reopen an investigation that Joe Biden forced them to shut down
• Beat Hillary in 2016

Clearly except for the first and last items nothing that the Democrats are talking about are crimes much less grounds for impeachment.

After spending a fortune and working for years Mueller, who every Democrat is on record saying is the most honest and intelligent man in the history of humanity, declared that there was absolutely no evidence that Trump or anyone working for Trump or with Trump colluded with Russia.

Yet Democrats are acting as if this is still an open case. There reasoning is the following:

• We know that Trump colluded with Russia otherwise Hillary couldn't have lost
• Mueller said he didn't prove that Trump didn't collude with Russia
• Hence it's possible that in fact Trump did collude with Russia

Essentially Democrats are saying that Trump is guilty until proven innocent. By that criteria we can declare that Elizabeth Warren is guilty of killing native Americans and eating them.

The Democrats are using the fascists idea of justice in order to try and nullify the 2016 election.  They're saying that their political enemy is guilty even though there is no evidence of Trump did anything wrong; guilty until proven innocent, the fascist way.

The obvious question to ask about the obstruction charge is is it even logically possible for an innocent man to obstruct an investigation into a crime he didn't commit?  After all obstructing something means keeping it from going where it's supposed to go and the destination of every investigation is justice.  Hence if Trump had ended an investigation into a crime he knew didn't happen he wouldn't be obstructing anything he'd be speeding it up.

But even without that issue Mueller who was desperate to indict Trump--and who has stated publicly that the lack of an indictment had nothing to do with his supposed inability to indict a sitting president--couldn't find any ground for obstruction.

Instead his team made up some rather bizarre ideas including the idea that an innocent person saying they were innocent was obstruction and asked the world what it thought about them.  Remember that no one on that team was willing to actually go to a Grand Jury and try to get an indictment.

Finally the lie de jure; Trump asking the Ukraine to reopen an investigation that Joe Biden hand forced them to shut down is wrong.

The facts are straight forward:

• The one and only corrupt prosecutor that Joe Biden used the full power of his office of Vice President to shut down just happened to be investigating a company that had Joe's son, Hunter, on its board.
• Totally coincidentally the replacement for that corrupt prosecutor dropped the investigation into the company that was paying Biden's son.
• Someone who admits to not having actually heard the conversation or read a transcript of it says that Trump tried to convince the incoming President of Ukraine to reopen that investigation.
• That someone agrees that Trump didn't do what Biden did; namely offer a quid pro quo if the Ukrainians did what he wanted.
• Trump denies having pressured the Ukrainian President elect.
• The Ukraine Foreign Minister says that Trump is right.

But the Democrats say that while it's fine to investigate a sitting president for two years with absolutely no factual basis other than a report paid for by the presidents opponent, produced by an British ex spy, the content of which is all unverified second and third hand hearsay from Russian sources--no chance of disinformation there-- they also say that it's a crime for a US president to tell Ukraine that it no longer has to fear the US punishing them if they investigate a company which happens to have Hunter Biden on its board.

Yep it's clear Trump is guilty of the ultimate crime; daring to say that Democrats and their children are not above the law.