I am retired, and I am focused on what is happening in America. That means that I have the luxury of getting my information \u201craw,\u201d straight from the Impeachment hearings, or straight from the debate stage. I don\u2019t need the filters of news commentators, whether I like them or not. I can get it all, in real time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That made Wednesday a really long day. The Impeachment Hearings began at nine, with Ambassador Gordon Sondland telling a compelling story of the \u201calternate\u201d track of American diplomacy. As Sondland said, it doesn\u2019t seem like an \u201calternate\u201d when the President\u2019s Chief of Staff, the Secretaries of State and Energy, the Ambassador to the European Union and the Special Envoy to Ukraine were \u201cin the loop\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
And it doesn\u2019t seem like an \u201calternate\u201d either when the President of the United States himself said to Sondland and Volker, \u201ctalk to Rudy\u201d. Sondland (and all of the others) either took their cues from the President\u2019s attorney, Rudy Giuliani, or at least acquiesced in his actions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
No, the President never said to Sondland, \u201c\u2026you tell the Ukrainians that if they want their meetings and their money, they need to tell the world they\u2019re investigating Biden and Crowd Strike\u201d. Donald Trump doesn\u2019t work that way. He never has. His last \u201cpersonal attorney\u201d Michael Cohen explained that to us in his testimony to the House Oversight Committee. He told us about Mr. Trump\u2019s \u201ccode\u201d. Mr. Cohen said that the President would never say, \u201cgive me that tie\u201d. He would say, \u201cI really like that tie, it would look good on me\u201d. If you were around Mr. Trump, you knew what to do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sondland isn\u2019t an experienced ambassador. And he isn\u2019t experienced with testifying to House committees either. As Congressman Maloney dramatically pointed out, it took Sondland three times to get his testimony \u201cright\u201d. It was still replete with hundreds of \u201cI don’t recall\u201d statements, ones that still might come back to haunt him with the danger of perjury charges. But he is now on the record, putting his entire \u201calternate track\u201d under the gun (and under the bus).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mulvaney, Pompeo, Perry, Volker, Sondland, and of course Giuliani: all knew that the President was asking for \u201ca favor\u201d in exchange of $400 million in US aid and a White House meeting. And the later testimony of Defense Department Deputy Assistant Secretary Laura Cooper debunked the argument that \u201cthe Ukrainians didn\u2019t know\u201d. Republican Congressmen, particularly Jim Jordan of Ohio, have been chanting this litany over and over; that there couldn\u2019t be a \u201cquid pro quo\u201d since the Ukrainians didn\u2019t know the money was held. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
But this money was a matter of survival to the Ukrainians. They were following it closely, and after the Presidential phone call of July 25th<\/sup>, were immediately in contact with Cooper\u2019s office, asking what the status of the money was, and as time went on, why it was being held up. <\/p>\n\n\n\n They heard the President of the United States ask for a \u201cfavor,\u201d and they knew what he wanted. The \u201cquid\u201d was there, and they prepared the \u201cquo\u201d with a scheduled CNN interview. The Whistleblower\u2019s Report and the House Committees disrupted the \u201cdeal,\u201d and Trump tried to call it off, telling Sondland, \u201cthere is no quid pro quo\u201d. He was right, the deal was over: he got caught.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cbones\u201d of the deal are now obvious. Jim Jordan and the gang will continue to rant and rave, but it seems to me the facts of the crime are there. The only questions left are: does this attempted bribery rise to the level of impeachment and removal, and do House and Senate Republicans have the political courage to act. <\/p>\n\n\n\n If the impeachment power means anything, it must mean this. So it comes down to Republican political courage. Don\u2019t hold your breath.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So those were the \u201cyesterday\u201d hours. Then there were the \u201ctomorrow\u201d hours, the Democratic Debate. Two hours that weren\u2019t dominated with the gangster actions of Donald Trump, but with ideas and hopes for the future. Everyone on that stage would be better than Trump, though Tulsi Gabbard should be disqualified for duplicating Trump\u2019s foreign policy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The arguments about health care are about process, not outcome. They all want every American to be covered: it just how we get there. And Democrats (really, Democrats) were talking about fiscal responsibility, about how they plan to pay for what they want to do. That\u2019s shocking: in just a decade, the party of \u201ctax and spend\u201d is now the party of controlling the debt. <\/p>\n\n\n\n On the scorecard: Booker, Klobuchar and Harris had great nights. Booker\u2019s closing argument citing John Lewis stirred the soul. Mayor Pete seemed to hold back, a man who for the first time has something to lose, and Warren and Sanders could be plugged in from any of the other debates \u2013 little has changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And Joe Biden is Joe Biden: take the older version or not. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Oh, and Andrew Yang, someone please win the election and make Andrew Yang the \u201cfuture Czar\u201d for the administration. His ideas are compelling, as are many of the others. Whoever wins the nomination; let\u2019s use the rest of this \u201cbench\u201d to get things done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Fiona Hill is taking her seat in front of the committee. Adam Schiff is telling us the story of today. The hearings are about to begin. History is in the room.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Debates<\/h3>\n\n\n\n