Congressman Adam Schiff and his Democratic minions continue to confound with their determined efforts to hinder Republican attempts to make the case for President Trump in the impeachment inquiry.
It seems clear at this point that what is now on the public record has failed to persuade even a handful of Republicans. And given that the public record is filled with highly suggestive, though inconclusive, information leaked from closed deposition hearings – even though what was leaked was presumably cherry-picked to make the best Democratic case – one wonders why Schiff and company would not want to eliminate any lingering thought that had a full counter-record been permitted to be made, the president might be vindicated.
Good examples are the certain to-be denials by Schiff of Republican requests to call Nellie Ohr and Hunter Biden to testify in Congress. How can Trump’s explanation that his conversations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky were about pursuing Ukranian corruption vis-à-vis these two (not his own political gain) be fully evaluated without their testimony.
Ohr testified to Congress that in 2015 she worked as a contractor for the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which she said used Ukrainian sources for information assisted in the preparation of the Steele Dossier comprising unsubstantiated allegations about then candidate Trump in 2016. Surely her testimony is probative of Trump’s claims of illegal Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 elections.
Similarly, Trump has claimed that in 2015, Hunter Biden parlayed help from his relationship with his father, Vice President Joe Biden, into securing a plum and highly lucrative seat on a Ukrainian energy company board for which he was utterly unqualified. Surely his testimony is relevant to any evaluation of Trump’s support for pursuing a corrupt link he claims was in play.
Yet Schiff and company persist in placing stumbling blocks to full disclosure. However, if they fear that their case may be undermined by what the Republicans might bring to the table, then that only means their case against the president is not a valid one. And if they have no such fear, then why would they not want the evidence to be brought forth?
Moreover, if the Democratic goal is the removal of Trump from office why wouldn’t the Democrats pursue a strategy that promises at least the hope of damning evidence surfacing? They surely are aware, as we all are, that the current case they have made is doomed to failure in the Senate.
Perhaps, though, the goal all along was simply to load the public record with rank, third party hearsay in a vainglorious effort to derail a disruptive president with a disruptive agenda. We hope not.
