Donald Trump impeachment: what comes next? I FT


No president, no
official can demand that an ally of
the United States do anything in
particular to help his or her political ambitions
as a condition of receiving help from our country. So obviously we’ve been through
several weeks, almost a month of private hearings in the SCIF,
the secure room of the Capitol, where the Intelligence
Committee has been asking for hours and hours. And some of these
daylong hearings have been 10, 12 hours
behind closed doors. Those have almost
run their course. We are starting
to get people who are appearing, testifying to the
same thing over and over again. So we have a pretty
good sense of what happened in two incidents. One is the famous
call between Zelensky, the president of Ukraine,
and Donald Trump, and whether there was a quid
pro quo there in terms of money, military aid for
assistance to dig up dirt on Democrats inside Ukraine, but
also, the broader scheme that has been going on run largely by
Rudy Giuliani, the president’s private attorney, and
what that looked like. So we basically have had
testimony in private. People begin to repeat the
narrative so that the Democrats have felt we’ve gone this far. We have the vote on
the Hill in the House this week where they
have now formally set the rules for public hearings. So I think we’re actually
going to get to a point where we actually
might have fireworks. It has been all these
hearings in the past. When we talk about impeachment,
and we talk about big scandals, the big drama the big theatre
happens in these big public hearings. And I think that’s going
to the next thing we’re going to watch for
and to what extent the Democrats can
make hay of this one and start winning over
more of the public. But also, more
importantly, are there Republicans, particularly
in the Senate, which would have to judge
any impeachment hearing? Are there Republicans in the
Senate that will be peeled off by some of these revelations? Do you think it’s ever
appropriate for the president to use his office to
solicit investigations into a domestic
political opponent? Soliciting investigations into
a domestic political opponent. I don’t think that would be
in accord with our values. What we’ve learned
from the hearings, not only in the last week,
but in the last two weeks, really, is incidents
that focus around that call again, that famous
call that Trump made to the new president
in Ukraine, demanding – for lack of a better
word – that they dig up some dirt both on the Bidens
but also this strange conspiracy theory where a lot
of Trump allies think that the Ukrainians were
somehow involved in hacking the Democratic party. That phone call, we’ve had
people testifying who were on that call, including
Alexander Vindman, who was a lieutenant-colonel
in US army, who basically has testified and
said that there was…he was disturbed by it enough to go
to the lawyers at the NSC. We’ve also heard testimony
from the acting ambassador to the Ukraine, William Taylor,
who has said there was indeed a quid pro quo that in his eyes,
the president was withholding military aid. And remember, the Ukrainians
are in a shooting war with the Russians right now
and Russian-backed separatists, withheld that military aid
in exchange for that digging up of dirt on the Democrats. So we have a lot of meat put
on the bones of what we’re initially just a
whistleblower complaint, which include a lot of supposition,
a lot of second-hand accounts. We now have primary accounts of
what the president and his men did to basically push
the Ukrainians to do his own political dirty
work inside Ukraine. Today, the country
just witnessed the only bipartisan vote
on that floor was against. The question to the speaker
are the same questions I provided in a letter about
the unfair process that we had. What has changed since March? In all the hearings,
there’s nothing compelling, nothing overwhelming. So the speaker should
follow her own words on what bipartisan
vote on that floor and in the sham that has
been putting this country through this nightmare. There has been White
House talking points on the president’s
call being of no issue and of being not
particularly controversial. You haven’t heard the
Republicans on the Hill eat that line that much when
you’ve heard them saying is that they’re
attacking the process. The other interesting
thing on this is to watch the
Senate Republicans. Again, when you talk about
White House talking points, what you’ve heard
from a lot of Senate Republicans now is I don’t
want to comment because I could be a juror, right? If the House impeaches,
it is the Senate that will hear the evidence
and decide whether to eject the president from office. And the fact that Republicans
in the Senate, many of them now are saying, I’m
not going to comment because I want to be
a juror means they’re keeping their powder dry. They’re not instinctively
falling into line. Now, the vote in
the House this week was a strict party-line vote. We had the Democrats
almost unanimously voting to set up the procedure to have
a public hearing on impeachment – yet almost every
Republican on the other side – but it’s been interesting to
watch the Senate Republicans. Mitt Romney has been
the most prominent one to break from the
president on this. But even ones who we suspect to
be more loyal and more partisan are keeping their powder dry. They’re not commenting. They’re not coming out in
favour of the president. And they’re using this
phrase – I am a juror. I don’t want to comment –
which I think is very telling.

52 thoughts on “Donald Trump impeachment: what comes next? I FT

  1. Is this the only way liberals think they can win? Im British and we are sick of hearing about Trump's impeachment. A flagrant abuse of litigation to gain political advantage

  2. An attempted coup through lies about Trump:

    When asking for information from the Ukranian president, Trump immediately after asking for a favor brought up Crowdstrike not Biden, so no laws were broken. And no FEC campaign laws were broken by Trump given that desiring information from Ukraine and/or China isn't breaking the law as the FEC has declared that information is not a thing of value.

    The United States and Ukraine have had a two decades long agreement that stipulates the president can look into matters of corruption. In conjunction with the aforementioned FEC code, this more than protects the president.

    Every presidential administration has said to foreign governments to do A or B wont happen.

    Even Obama's administration did when Biden said to do A (fire the prosecutor) or B wouldn't happen. The difference is, Biden's son was being protected by Biden because the prosecutor has signed affidavits declaring he was looking into investigating further into certain matters.

    Ukraine not being aware about funding issues totally clears Trump. Ukraine said there was no pressure or Quid Pro Quo.

    No violations of FEC code, no Quid Pro Quo, and no bribery or extortion on Trump's part.

  3. We have now heard that the first whistleblower, even before being exposed, was a known Biden staffer and worked as an Obama holdover, and now we know worked closely in in the NSC with a former Hillary staffer, flew over to Ukraine with Biden, wrote an anti-Trump speech for Susan Rice, and met with Schifty before releasing the whistleblower complaint. Schifty himself admitted lying about not meeting this whistleblower on MSNBC via Sam Stein.

    That complaint looked like it was written by lawyers and for lawyers (as we can see from meeting with Schifty), is riddled with errors and inconsistencies, and is full of hearsay. Not reliable.

    The 2nd whistleblower is said to have 1st hand information but the 1st whistleblower provided that 2nd hand.

    Then comes Sondland and Taylor (who was a staffer for Obama and another Dem) as witnesses who contradict each other. Then Vindman comes as a witness, but he apparently broke the law by talking about the phone call to others and he along with Taylor is tied to Democrats.

    Then comes Morrison as a witness before Schifty who torpedoed everything that Sondland and Taylor said. Yet the Washington Post has lied saying Morrison corroborates what Taylor said.

  4. The money had been appropriated by Congress and was held back by trump to force them to get some dirt on Biden. This was named the “drug deal” by Bolton and the conversation hidden away in a super secret server. What else do you need ….

  5. In all the years trump has been Predisent, what has the democrats actually done except try to divide the American people?

  6. The media can hide the fact that this tis PHONY ????

    COUP 

    The dims  tried to derail  Kavanaugh using no DP and inventing  / creating  witnesses with no evidence – MEE TOO

    Then The dims claimed  Russia  and assembled  the 

    Mueller  inquiry   made up of  dims  lawyers  and still they didn't  get any thing

    Then they claimed  Ukraine but  forgot Bidens crime came first 

    Then they claimed  Recession but the economy won’t  comply 

    Then they claimed Impeachment with out Due Process 

    But the  fake impeachment try is DOA   and the media  wont comply 

    All this  in the hope to  win back the WH  ??

    The illusion  is  debunked  and 

    The 2020 election will confirm  as  Nancy has to go back to her slum in SF ,Thanks to the colored girls ??

    Illegals get Due Process but not the POTUS  

    The Don is correct this is a democratic  COUP

    and it”s not working ?

  7. They cannot win if there is no evidence. That said, it is the Dem's agenda to stain this President and improve their chances in 2020. This president has been so successful and proved right in so many things that the Dem's have no chance next year. Their hope is that they can distract voters attention away from these successes to a SUSPICION of impeachable crimes. They know this will not pass the Senate and they hope only to damage a successful president. If the voters fall for this, USA beware. This president is working for the USA and the Dem's are NOT!! The Dem's are ONLY interested in getting back at the trough.

  8. Yet another empty liberal talking head reading the script Soro's dictated, only those on the left will swallow this crap and ask for more!

  9. I think Capitol Hill is setting us up for a civil war there hasn't been one since Lincoln too many people in this country right now everything has the looks and feel of a Civil War coming

  10. Coup Coup Coup. The DemonRats, the fake MSM media including the Times and the deep state are all going to hang. For that I Pray.

  11. So the leftist press doesn't give a crap that the Obama administration stopped an investigation by quid pro Joe threatening to withhold a billion dollars in aid? What about not investigating into the hell of three years into a fake Russian conspiracy theory that included a Ukrainian company called CrowdStrike? Peter Spiegel doesn't investigate anything, he regurgitates DNC talking points.

  12. Trumhanitifilvjednitvatvilensobistklarbordelchmakmiklargrostentrumvarenbansochmakmikisiginklarkomen

  13. This is all about our lefty agenda. TRUMP and BORIS are not obeying to the narrative so the establishment want them removed.

  14. Love the duck-billed expression on the womans face next to the speakers at 0:14, it's far from surprising with 10 to 12 hours of behind closed doors testimony.
    Why can't we have this on a public broadcast station with the public asking relevant questions to all those involved in this whole story?

  15. Impeachment Enquiry its not Impeachment. You know The Democrats are lying their lips are Moving. Criminal Democrats being protected by the Media. Absolute crap the Dems will lose most of their seats at the Next Election. They are treasonous and Seditious..all cherry picked clips. these Idiots your putting forward are all Trump Haters of little meaning in a Fake trail

  16. Careful, USA! Impeaching your elected president could become a regular thing. Democracy come to full flower, wilting and dying back into a smelly mess?

  17. AM SO SICK OF TRUMP and BORIS. SEND THE TWO MONSTERS back to the SWAMP.

    BORIS still has not even gone back into his Ditch… yet alone the SWAMP

  18. If Republicans weren't afraid they wouldn't spend so much time denying the fact that Trump is a crook.
    This impeachment is long overdue. He should never have been allowed to stand for office.

  19. Acontecerá o quê…é um fogo fátuo …Será que com Trump se assistirá mais depressa à queda do império Americano ? do que o seu Impeachment? ou a sua derrota em 2020!!

  20. All these CORRUPT CAREER ORIENTED POLITICIANS under spell of jezebel hrc including ugly swamps will face MILITARY STYLE TRIBUNAL and head to GITMO. MARK THIS. ENOUGH OF THESE DRAMA.

  21. Hail Trump ! Long Live the King ! The world loves Trump, Americans need to stop listening to the international jewry and start believing in Trump.

  22. Ok. What happens with the investigation of Biden and his son, nobody says anything why?????????. Why the Democrats don't say anything about this matter, that should be the real investigation Biden AN HIS SON.

  23. Impeachment to the total degree of Chaos. Who will Challenge the Nation of Premunition. Let the Market crash and let it rise to its own. We will show that America is the Greatest Country.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *