This is in response to the gentleman who asked the Opinion readers to “Open your eyes” and who believes that “Democrats are going on facts” and that “Republicans say the Democrats didn’t do their jobs.” If the gentleman actually did look at the facts, he would see what the Democrats did with respect to impeaching President Trump was neither based in fact or lawful and had these charges been brought against any other person in any other court of law, they would have been thrown out by the judge before any witnesses were produced and indeed, even before a jury being sworn in.
The Democrats in the House did not allow the president of the United States a fundamental American right—the right of a defendant to have due process. This is a right that every American defendant has. Every American has the right to confront their accuser, to refute the charges, cross-examine witnesses and put up a defense; all of which was denied to the president by the House. Even if this means going to court to quash a subpoena, he has every right to do this. Every American, including President Trump has the right of due process. Presidents are also are allowed to invoke certain privileges, including executive privilege to prevent the distribution of documents that may impair governmental functions or national security. If there’s a disagreement between the House and the President, it’s up to the courts (the third branch of government) to determine if the documents should be provided—that’s how our Constitution was written, we’re a republic, and have three branches of government under the Constitution, the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial.
With respect to the Democrats’ subpoenas, they were invalid and this was why the president refused to comply with them. They were invalid because they were issued prior to the House voting to start an impeachment inquiry. The House is required to vote to start an inquiry, it’s not the right of Ms. Pelosi to just start an impeachment inquiry and then have the House Democrats issue subpoenas. By law, a vote is required to be taken with the full House so that they can all decide whether or not an impeachment inquiry needs to take place. If this had happened prior to the subpoenas being issued, the subpoenas would have been properly executed, but since they were not, they were faulty at their inception and the president had every right to refuse to comply with them. The Democrats’ talking point on this is that “he ordered people to refuse them.” This is their (your) spin on the issue; it is not the whole truth, however.
In addition, the gentleman’s letter said that “McConnell and Graham have explicitly said they would not be impartial (before taking an oath to be impartial).” But seriously—and I mean seriously—do you think that any of the Democrats that took that same oath, were impartial when they said even prior to the impeachment that the president should be impeached for various sundry things?
Do you honestly believe that Sens. Schumer, Durbin, Warren, Harris, Blumenthal, Coons, Stabenow, Hirono and, yes, Sinema, were impartial prior to taking the oath to be impartial? If you do, you’re not seeing things clearly and need to open your own eyes. Seriously. This was an impeachment straight down party lines and because of this, it should never have been brought.
One of the Democrats’ favorite talking points is that they did not get to produce any witnesses during the trial, but what about the 18 witnesses that the House deposed and didn’t allow the president to have council present or the ability to cross-examine them unless they capitulated to Mr. Schiff’s terms, i.e., not being able to call his own witnesses, not being able to have counsel present, etc. The Democrats also said that they had an “open-and-shut” case against the president and didn’t need any more witnesses. Heck, they didn’t even produce one of their 18 witness depositions to the Senate; I wonder why that was? Could it be that perhaps it had evidence that was contrary to the Democrats’ point of view? It was the one for the inspector general—why wasn’t that one appropriate to be provided to the full Senate for consideration?
Their open-and-shut case was only true until the president’s legal counsel was finally able to put forth a defense. Then, it all collapsed. Imagine this happening to you. You’re charged with a crime, where you are not allowed to have counsel present or to put up a defense and almost half of the jury hates you. How would you react? If you believe you wouldn’t fight back with everything at your disposal, think again.
You’d tell as many people as would listen that your rights were being abused, that you’re being denied representation, that the jury is biased against you. And yet you want President Trump to sit back and take it, like he’s the one who is supposed to take the high road simply because he’s the president. He’s also a person and an American and what he’s had to go through for the past three and a half years would make a saint swear on Twitter. All because he is the one who won the presidency, and the Democrats in Congress are still upset about this and that’s the real reason that the impeachment and constant harassment by the Democrats still exists, and if you look at it for what it is, it is harassment.
We the people of the United States have to pay for their nonacceptance—you and me; if the Democrats are not trying to impeach the president, they want to increase our taxes, ship jobs back overseas, allow illegal aliens free passage into the United States and then provide them with free health care, low-cost schooling, financial aid, get out of jail free passes and drivers’ licenses.
Heck, I’m an American and the illegal aliens now have more rights than I do. How is this right? How do you truly justify all of this? I, for one, don’t want to pay for millions of illegal aliens’ health care. It’s expensive enough with Obamacare, which raised health care costs tremendously for everyone, without having to pay for someone else who committed a crime and came here illegally.
I recall Ms. Pelosi saying you have to pass the bill to see what’s in it. Seriously, who in their right mind passes a bill without reading it! I also recall, the statement, “If you like your plan and your doctor, you can keep your plan and your doctor.” That’s another Obama promise gone by the wayside, but some folks seem to have selective memories.
To quote your final sentence, “Open your eyes to the facts and truth.” But only by diligently researching the truth and not just listening to the Democratic talking points will you be able to open your eyes to the facts and really see the truth. In doing my own research, I’ve discovered that Democrats in Congress are actually doing what they’re accusing the Republicans and the president of doing.
Oh, and by the way, when Biden drops out and is no longer a candidate for president, will it be OK to finally investigate him for bribery against a foreign nation (Ukraine)—something that he actually confessed to doing? Apparently, according to Democrats, all you have to do to not be investigated for a crime is to run for president. Once you’re a Democrat running for president, you’re apparently above the law. Well, again to quote Ms. Pelosi, “No one is above the law.” Well, except maybe for the Bidens and Democrats in Congress. Must be nice to be a Democrat in Congress these days and be able to get away with—everything, even telling the people lies about that telephone call (thank you Mr. Schiff) in such a way as to make people believe that’s the way it really happened. It wasn’t a parody. He was trying to get away with making the people believe what he was saying was true. He truly didn’t expect the president to release the transcript the very next day.)
Open your eyes and see the real truth, the Democrats in Congress and the press only tell you the truth they want you to hear and it’s definitely not the whole truth.
Look at this hypocrisy
House Speaker Pelosi rips up Trump’s speech. Trump shows his ignorance by calling it illegal, which it is not. Some are claiming outrage and disrespect.
Where was/is all the anger and shouts of disrespect about Trump grabbing genitalia, saying he can shoot someone, cursing during speeches, making up childish names for people, and making fun of a handicapped person? What about not shaking Pelosi’s hand before the speech? Trump is the “leader” of the free world. Is this how a person in that position should act? The fact that people don’t show more outrage and claim disrespect over that, but do about ripping up paper, says a lot about themselves. You can’t debate crazy, but you can point out facts and hypocrisy.
Pick a side
I love my country. I love my liberty and my protected rights under the Constitution. After the Benghazi debacle, many residents there held up signs of apology for the press expressing their unity with American ideals. The Iranian people have been yearning to rebuild their alliance with America since ’79 and may yet overthrow their oppressive government soon.
Hong Kong residents continue their protest against oppression in favor of liberty. I love to listen to the fighter jets of nearby Luke AFB and when I hear them, I thank God for our protected liberties. Sadly, the greatest threat to American liberty cannot be repelled by our brave men and women in uniform because that threat is domestic. The sickening irony is that the only people who do not recognize the United States as the beacon of light and goodness in our otherwise dark world are our elected Socialist officials from within. I stand for the Bill of Rights, liberty and capitalism. I support the values of work, industry, education, religious liberty, self-reliance, personal accountability, and thus I support President Trump. Because of this, the radical Socialist left labels me as a dangerous, incompetent, deplorable, racist, illiterate rube. Again, I implore my classic JFK liberal friends to recognize that you haven’t left your party, but your party has certainly left you.
Former Obama National Finance Committee Member Don Peebles recently said, “I just don’t recognize the Democratic Party right now...the party has turned so far left.” Sanders is an angry old Socialist who honeymooned in Soviet Russia and speaks highly of Castro and Maduro. Warren is a hypocritical Socialist and even Sanders says her policies are unsustainable. Quid Pro Joe is a lying, plagiarizing sinking ship. What do these candidates really have to offer us? Free this, and free that? There’s no such thing as a free lunch; someone is paying for it. Liberty and free enterprise have come head-to-head with unabashed Socialism; one offers a bright future, the other promises ruinous disappointment.