Thank you for being one of our most loyal readers. Please consider supporting community journalism by subscribing.
Re: “Who do you believe should be above the law?” by Ron Taylor, Thursday:
Mr. Taylor’s letter today produces some intriguing mingling of characters. The Al Capone example could be cited by Republicans as an example of the litany: Russian collusion, Stormy Daniels, Steele dossier — whose author admitted, under oath, that he could not verify — Ukrainian coercion when it appears that their involvement was on Hillary’s behalf: If we can’t get him on this, we’ll try this.
Mr. Taylor suggests hearsay was the only alternative because Trump would not cooperate, neglecting the thousands of pages of testimony from White House staffers and members of the executive branch over the past two-plus years.
The Capone allusion also betrays the Left’s continuing, all-consuming hatred of this man whose bluntness and combativeness upsets them. Such fixations cause irony in their hysterical attempts to remove a man who doesn’t act presidential enough for them.
Granted, Obama was dignified, scholarly and properly aloof enough to be “presidential.” His predecessor was an understated, blue jean and boots-wearing man of the people who mangled the English language. Given all that, Obama looked pretty good, though his policies were largely ineffective, if not economically disastrous. Yet, because he “looked” like a president, he got a free pass from the press and the Left. To his credit, in retirement, he has tried to rein in the extremes of the “woke” Democrats who are leading the Left’s lemmings off a cliff as 2020 approaches.
What makes the “hearsay evidences” doubly disturbing is that the Dems are finally admitting that this has been a continuing process. On Monday, Pelosi answered a Fox News reporter’s question about the seeming rush to impeach. With surprising candor, she said the effort goes back “at least two years., really further than that.”
This process has spent millions of dollars, found nothing and then manufactured the current charges, ironically omitting the “bribery” that supposedly accompanied the Ukrainian arms deal. Why was that, one wonders? A police officer would not issue a speeding ticket if someone were to say, “I have it on good hearsay evidence, the only available, that John Smith was speeding yesterday on Airport Boulevard.”
Yet, “hearsay” is a valid piece of evidence to remove a president from office? The Left’s irrational hatred of Trump produces dark irony worthy of Jonathan Swift or Hawthorne.
As to the Nixon allusion, it was part of a David Frost interview with Nixon; subject: national security, not Watergate. In its rush to remove Trump, the Loony Left has lowered the bar considerably. They’ve set a standard that may make future presidents pawns of the excitable partisan masses, something Federalist 51 and 10 warned of.
Even their expert witnesses, three eminent law professors, could not conclude that a phone call was impeachable. Facts be damned! Full speed ahead!
When Schiff is caught in continuous lies, booed at a town hall meeting with constituents and still treated as an “expert” who has “masterfully” guided this process on MSNBC, the Dems are surely heading for the cliff’s edge, lemming-like.
I’ll take Trump’s incivility and pugnaciousness over the Left’s hysterical reenactment of Salem, which resulted in 18 hangings, one pressing and a dog’s death, all based on “hearsay evidence.”