![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2017\/01\/Trump-WomensMarch_2017-top-1510075_32409710246.jpg\")
Yeah, it feels a bit silly to be writing this down \u2014 it\u2019s neither something where I feel like I have something meaningful to add to the conversation, nor is it a cathartic exercise for something that\u2019s irritating me.\u00a0 But it feels appropriate to say a few words anyway.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s my bottom line:<\/p>\n
I think it\u2019s more likely than not that Trump thought that there were corrupt Hunter Biden dealings which he would unearth by prodding the Ukrainians.<\/p>\n
But I am not persuaded that Trump\u2019s actions met a standard of impeachable conduct, or were measurably worse than other sorts of \u201cabuse of power\u201d of other elected or appointed government officials over time.<\/p>\n
After all, Obama\u2019s FBI was investigating Trump with the so-called \u201cdossier.\u201d\u00a0 His IRS withheld tax recognition of Tea Party groups.\u00a0 I don\u2019t think that involving foreign governments crosses some sort of red line, and there\u2019s no indicator that Trump intended to corruptly frame the younger Biden of corruption, or engage in other sorts of direct actions against political opponents.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s more, there are many elements of the Democrats\u2019 case which are simply so weak as to weaken this core point.<\/p>\n
Who cares that Trump thought that Ukraine was involved in server leaks rather than (just) Russia?\u00a0 That he stands accused of believing in conspiracy theories is not an impeachable misdeed.\u00a0 Revisiting the Mueller investigation is equally irrelevant.<\/p>\n
And \u2014 yes, my husband is listening to the hearings as we speak \u2014 it is simply not a matter of our national security for Ukraine to receive that withheld military aid.\u00a0 After all, under Obama, the US limited aid to Ukraine to \u201chumanitarian aid\u201d (I remember complaints that Ukrainians could hardly use blankets to defend themselves).\u00a0 If Obama could decide that military aid was not appropriate, how could it have now become a matter of vital national security for it to be implemented?<\/p>\n
Does it meet the lower threshold of \u201cnational interest\u201d?\u00a0 Sure.\u00a0 But that is something that has a much greater degree of discretion to it.\u00a0 You and I can disagree about a great many things that one or the other of us might deem to be in the \u201cnational interest.\u201d\u00a0 Are tariffs \u201cin the national interest\u201d or is free trade \u201cin the national interest\u201d?\u00a0 Is it \u201cin the national interest\u201d to provide visas to as many potential visitors as might reasonably qualify, or is it \u201cin the national interest\u201d to vet potential arrivals thoroughly, and deny entrance if there appears to be a risk?\u00a0 There are so many issues where there are partisan or other disagreements about what is in the national interest \u2014 and there are likewise many actions that presidents take that they might declare to be \u201cin the national interest\u201d but are as much about gaining support from their political base.\u00a0 When Trump announced that he would \u201cbuild the wall,\u201d when Obama declared that he was giving legal status to illegal immigrants brought to the US as children, were these \u201cin the national interest\u201d or \u201cgaining support from the base\u201d?<\/p>\n
And the fact that, as Democrats repeat, 15,000 Ukrainians have died in the war, does not mean that it is a matter of US national security.\u00a0 After all, we (that is, the US government) took no action as ISIS gained strength and killed considerable numbers of Syrians and Iraqis, enslaved Yazidis and Christians, and so forth; only after reports grew worse and worse did the US send troops.<\/p>\n
Now, again, it\u2019s more likely than not that Trump misused his power in this instance, but the repetition of \u201cnational security\u201d does not persuade me of the extent of Trump\u2019s misdeeds, but instead makes me more skeptical.<\/p>\n
So look:\u00a0 I know anti-Trump readers won\u2019t believe me when I say I don\u2019t like the man and I would be happy for him to turn out to have done something, well, impeachable.\u00a0 Nikki Haley 2020!, etc.\u00a0 But, geez, guys, not this.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Yeah, it feels a bit silly to be writing this down \u2014 it\u2019s neither something where I feel like I have something meaningful to add to the conversation, nor is it a cathartic exercise for something that\u2019s irritating me.\u00a0 But it feels appropriate to say a few words anyway. Here\u2019s my bottom line: I think […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[494,1305],"class_list":["post-16437","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-donald-trump","tag-trump-impeachment"],"yoast_head":"\n