The public hearing phase of the democrats’ impeachment inquiry/coup attempt began this week and the results have been devastating to opponents of President Trump. The “star” witnesses not only didn’t prove the case that Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine in exchange for political favors, but they busted the entire narrative that the President committed a crime or impeachable offense, and they did it with 3 simple answers.
The stated purpose of the impeachment inquiry is to determine if President Trump broke the law in a July phone call with Ukraine president Volodymyr Velensky. Democrats, who are in control of the proceedings and determine who gets to testify, have called 3 witnesses so far, none of whom have firsthand knowledge of the phone call. These three “star” witnesses also don’t have any proof that Trump broke any laws or did anything worthy of impeachment.
On Wednesday democrats called diplomats George Kent and Bill Taylor to testify. Neither of them had firsthand knowledge of the Trump/Zelensky phone call, but said that they were personally offended by what they heard about it. As if that wasn’t pathetic enough, there is this:
.@RepRatcliffe: “Are either of you here today to assert there was an impeachable offense in that call? Shout it out.”
“Anyone?”
*crickets* pic.twitter.com/hiCATGvGki
— Kevin McCarthy (@GOPLeader) November 13, 2019
Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe asked both men a very simple question:
“In this impeachment hearing today, where we impeach presidents for treason or bribery or other high crimes, where was the impeachable offense in that call? Are either of you here today to assert that there was an impeachable offense in that call? Shout it out. Anyone?” Ratcliffe asked.
Neither Kent nor Taylor had an answer, which is the same thing as them saying, “no we don’t know of any impeachable offense.”
Keep in mind, these are the democrats’ best witnesses in the case against Trump and they both just blew the impeachment inquiry out of the water.
On day two of the public hearings Friday, democrats called former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, whose only purpose in the matter seems to be that her feelings were hurt when Trump fired her from her post.
.@RepChrisStewart: “Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?”
Yovanovitch : “No.”
Your tax dollars are funding this…pic.twitter.com/EtY5rKomzK
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) November 15, 2019
Republican Rep. Chris Stewart had two simple questions for Yovanovitch:
“Do you have any information regarding the President of the United States accepting any bribes?” Stewart asked.
“No,” replied Yovanovitch.
“Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?” Stewart asked.
“No,” replied Yovanovitch.
There you have it: three star witnesses, zero evidence of wrongdoing. Why isn’t this inquiry over with?
If this was a preliminary hearing, the judge would throw the case out. If this were a trial, the judge would immediately dismiss all charges. The reason why this is continuing is because Adam Schiff is the “judge” and he’s already decided on guilt, he just needs to find a crime to fit his verdict.
At this point it doesn’t even look Schiff is going to be able to get the rest of the democrats in the House to vote for articles of impeachment. The case against Trump isn’t just weak sauce, it’s non-existent sauce and Schiff’s own witnesses proved that with 3 simple answers: no impeachable offense, no bribery, no criminal activity. Game over, man!
