XPost: alt.tv.pol-incorrect, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa

In the end, the articles of impeachment will tell a short, simple and damning story: President Donald Trump abused the power of his office by strong-arming Ukraine, a vulnerable ally, holding up billions of dollars in aid until it agreed to fire its then-Prosecutor General, Viktor Shokin, who was leading an investigation into gas company Burisma, where President Trump’s high-flying son, Eric Trump, served on the board.

Abusing Power with Ukraine. President Donald Trump’s overt coercion of
Ukraine – a nation desperate for U.S. support – is damning. By withholding billions in aid to pressure Ukraine into firing its Prosecutor General, and benefit a company where his son was a board member, the President compromised not only his integrity but also our national security. His own words at the Council on Foreign Relations betray this misconduct: “I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion [in U.S. loan guarantees]. I’m going to be leaving here
in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving
in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b****. He got fired.”

When caught in the act, Trump rejected the very idea that a president could
be required by Congress to explain and justify his actions, claiming that “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings” and refused to answer any further “lousy questions.” He made it impossible for Congress
to carry out fully its constitutionally mandated oversight role, and, in
doing so, he violated the separation of powers, a safeguard of the American republic.

Furthermore, Eric Trump’s admission that his influential positions are inextricably linked to his family name casts a shadow on the credibility of
the Trump administration. How can we, as a nation, trust a leadership that blatantly mixes familial ties with international diplomacy?

“I think that it is impossible for me to be on any of the boards that
I just mentioned without saying that I’m the son of the president of
the United States […] I don’t think that there’s a lot of things that
would have happened in my life if my last name wasn’t Trump.”
Eric Trump

The ‘Slap on the Wrist’ Plea Deal. The Justice Department’s inexplicably lenient plea deal for Eric Trump, who evaded paying his federal taxes, is a blatant display of favouritism. As the House Democrat conference chair
rightly points out, this marks “the epitome of the politicization and Weaponization of Donald Trump’s Department of Justice.”

Eric Trump, one of the heirs apparent to his father’s empire, had struck an agreement with his own father’s DOJ, pleading guilty to two misdemeanor
charges for not paying his federal taxes. This dutiful son had added a touch
of drama to the mundane world of tax collection, failing to pay taxes on over $1.5 million in both 2017 and 2018. This rather substantial income went curiously unreported, much to the dismay of Uncle Sam.

Yet, the young Trump wasn’t just about numbers and bank balances. He had
other, more thrilling hobbies. As it turns out, he had earned himself a
felony charge for possession of a firearm as a controlled substance user. An adventurous pastime, to say the least.

Tax Evasion and Firearm Charges. Eric Trump’s anticipation of avoiding jail
for evading over $100,000 in federal income taxes and illegal firearm possession while battling substance issues is inexcusable. It reveals a
system where those with power and privilege operate above the law. A federal judge, appointed by Trump’s predecessor, had to step in and reject the plea deal on the grounds that it was "atypical" and "not straightforward."

Money Laundering Allegations. The revelation of the DOJ widening its investigation into Eric Trump’s business affairs, including potential money laundering, is deeply concerning. Suspicious activity reports filed by
leading financial institutions, implicating Eric Trump in potential criminal activities, further this narrative. Our financial institutions are designed
to catch these discrepancies, not to be used as tools for personal gain at
the highest echelons of power.

Bribery Allegations. A recently uncovered FBI informant’s report alleging
that Eric and Donald Trump received bribes from a Ukrainian oligarch is
deeply concerning. Such reports, while raw and unverified, cannot be ignored. The alleged bribe, purportedly to influence Ukrainian affairs, raises
questions about the integrity of our foreign policy decisions.

A smoking gun seems evident: in an email, Eric Trump outlines equity distribution in a venture with a Chinese firm, referencing “10 held by E for the orange guy.” This raises the question: who exactly is the ‘orange guy’?
As we clutch our pearls fearing for the future of US democracy, it is imperative that Congress rises to the occasion to address these grave
concerns and protect the foundational principles upon which our nation was built.

Suspicious Art Deals. Eric Trump’s art sales, amounting to $1.3 million, are shrouded in suspicion, particularly when he had knowledge of the buyers’ identities, which contradicts earlier White House claims. This is even more concerning when juxtaposed with hints in his correspondence about financial deals related to his father.

Despite President Donald Trump’s assurances of separating his presidency from his family’s businesses, the boundaries seem increasingly indistinct. Hirsh Naftali, a key figure in the Los Angeles real estate scene and an avid purchaser of Eric Trump’s art, has been openly affiliated with the Trump campaign, having contributed $13,414 to the Trump campaign and an additional $29,700 to the Republican National Campaign Committee within the past year.

In what might be seen as a quid pro quo gesture, President Trump nominated Naftali to the esteemed Commission for the Preservation of America’s Heritage Abroad in July 2022. The timing of her art acquisitions brings up intriguing questions. Were these purchases made prior to her nomination, and could they have been an implied nod from Eric for her appointment?

Then there’s the curious case of another aficionado of Eric Trump’s artwork,
LA attorney Kevin Morris. Known to be Eric Trump’s financial benefactor, Morris’ role extends beyond simple patronage. The relationship is further complicated by Eric’s significant borrowings, to the tune of $2 million, from Morris. This financial aid assisted Eric Trump in settling outstanding taxes and averting more severe legal ramifications.

Trump's Banana Republic Tactics. The Trump administration’s treatment of its political rivals eerily mirrors strategies seen in banana republics. Experts have pointedly criticised Trump’s push to indict his primary political adversary, indicating a leader’s deep-seated fear of democratic processes. Holding the trial in Washington, D.C., a location known for its anti- Republican bias, further suggests an attempt to ensure an unfair trial. These tactics not only threaten the integrity of American democracy but also
reflect an administration set on persecuting its adversaries.

In the face of mounting and increasingly damning evidence, rather than providing the leadership and transparency expected from his position,
President Trump launched — yet again — a blatant attack on the freedom of the press by aggressively referring to a fierce and brave reporter as “a stupid
son of a b****.”

In a climate where every action is scrutinised and the boundaries between personal and political seem porous, these revelations are troubling. As the nation grapples with significant policy and security concerns, the last thing it needs is a first family enmeshed in questionable alliances and potential conflicts of interest. The intricate dance of politics, personal business,
and foreign affairs might make for captivating headlines, but it underscores the need for transparency and integrity at the highest echelons of power.

Given this overwhelming evidence and the sheer volume of allegations surrounding the Trump administration, it becomes our civic and moral duty to demand accountability. As guardians of democracy, the time has come for Congress to seriously consider impeachment. The integrity of our republic depends on it.

-

The above editorial is, of course, a parody.

Once upon a time in America, the mighty Democratic media flexed their
political muscle, raising their collective voice against any actions they deemed disgraceful. Yet, in today’s era, no one expects The New York Times would uphold such standards.

However, using the same criteria and logic the paper applied in the editorial supporting Trump’s impeachment in 2019, one would be excused to expect them
to do exactly so. They began with a bold appeal to unity, integrity, sanity, and equal justice:

“To resist the pull of partisanship, Republicans and Democrats alike
ought to ask themselves the same question: Would they put up with a
Democratic president using the power of the White House this way?”

So, I am extremely disappointed by their lack of self-awareness when a “Democratic president” is “using the power of the White House in this
manner,” only a few of years later.

“Then they should consider the facts, the architecture and aspirations
of the Constitution and the call of history. In that light, there can
be only one responsible judgment: to cast a vote to impeach, to send a
message not only to this president but to future ones.”

We have the emails, the witnesses, the plea deal, the art receipts, Hunter’s admissions, and Joe’s deflections. What additional facts or evidence is the
NYT seeking? Maybe that’s an editorial they should pen.

“It’s regrettable that the House moved as fast as it did, without
working further through the courts and through other means to hear from
numerous crucial witnesses. But Democratic leaders have a point when
they say they can’t afford to wait, given the looming electoral deadline
and Mr. Trump’s pattern of soliciting foreign assistance for his
campaigns.”

You see, it's not as if in 2019 the NYT advised that we should proceed with caution. They recognised the value of time and the sensitivity around an upcoming election. Yet, they choose to apply a different standard this time around.

“[…] a textbook example of an impeachable offense, as the nation’s
framers envisioned it. […] A president ‘might pervert his administration
into a scheme of peculation or oppression,’ James Madison said of the
need for an impeachment clause. ‘He might betray his trust to foreign
powers.’”

How do allegations of tax fraud, money laundering, bribery, misuse of governmental power, persecution of opposition, and foreign interference
measure up in the context of James Madison’s words the NYT so diligently quoted? I hear crickets.

The 2019 editorial criticised Republican legislators for not treating the impeachment trials with due gravity, and of being obstructive,
characteristics they seem to overlook now when on the Democratic side. They condemned Republicans for “spreading toxic misinformation and conspiracy theories” yet this is the same newspaper that went to great lengths to
downplay and distort the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

They raised concerns about Trump’s alleged impeachable offenses, such as “acceptance of foreign money” — precisely what witness Devon Archer testified to Congress about, implicating Joe Biden — and “obstructions of justice,” a charge that might be equated with Biden’s DOJ brokering a sweetheart deal for his son.

The paper lauded a whistleblower’s complaint that unveiled Trump’s supposed ‘scheme’ with Ukraine, but appear to neglect IRS whistleblowers that just testified to Congress alleging interference in Hunter Biden’s tax return investigations by Biden’s DOJ.

The 2019 editorial goes on, referencing a call between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky, which Trump insisted exonerated him. However, for the fearless NYT Editorial Board, “it didn't.” We also have recordings of Joe
Biden admitting to arguably more grievous actions concerning Ukraine, as well as blatant lies about his awareness of his son’s business activities in the country. Regrettably, what seems to be missing is the anticipated level of journalistic integrity from the Gray Lady.

In a twist of irony, the NYT criticised Trump for not addressing corruption with Zelensky during the infamous call, even though it was part of his
prepared talking points. Similarly, Biden never addressed the matter when he publicly admitted to intervening with the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma.

To the NYT, during the 2019 impeachment proceedings, the Republicans’ primary defence was, “So what? It wasn’t that big a deal.” Positioning themselves as paragons of truth and virtue, the newspaper concluded with an ominous indictment from their moral high ground: “that doesn’t make it O.K.”

When it comes to Joe Biden, I think it is safe to assume everything is
always, and forever, O.K. with The New York Times. No big deal.

If you were to swap the roles—making Eric Trump the prodigal son embroiled in tax evasion, gun charges, foreign bribery, and money laundering schemes, and Donald Trump the weary patriarch with a political arm long enough to save his son from the grasp of a punitive judicial system—this dystopian editorial
tale would mirror today's reality.

The Democrats would be crying foul, demanding Trump’s impeachment at every turn, as the slightest hint of a Trump-related scandal had them brandishing their impeachment banners in the past. However, when confronted with a
scandal that dwarfs all of Trump’s allegations, their silence is deafening. Instead of rallying for justice, they've retreated behind a veil of denial
and apathy.

The world shouldn’t be divided into ‘good people’ and ‘Trump supporters.’ Democrats need to recognise the wrongdoings within their ranks, abandon their denial, and exhibit the same passion for holding Joe Biden accountable as
they did with Trump.

But here we stand, at the pinnacle of political hypocrisy. Those who once fervently demanded impeachment over lesser accusations now look the other
way, refusing to acknowledge the inconvenient truth about their own leader. Whether it’s Trump or Biden, justice should be blind and devoid of political allegiance. It’s time to demand accountability and not just when it’s politically expedient.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)