A Successful Coup Against
Trump Will Murder American Democracy
A Successful Coup Against
Trump Will Murder American Democracy
Paul Craig Roberts
President Trump calls it a
witch hunt, but it really is a coup against American democracy. The Democrats
who want Trump impeached don’t realize this. They just want Trump impeached
because they don’t like him. The impeach Trump people don’t understand that if
the coup against the elected president succeeds, every future president will
know that if he attempts to “drain the swamp” or bring any changes not
acceptable to the ruling elite, he, too, will be destroyed. Voters who want
real change will also get the message and give up trying to elect a president
or members of the House and Senate who will be responsive to voters. It will
mean the end of democracy and accountable government. Unhindered rule by the
Deep State and associated elites will take democracy’s place.
It is unfortunate that
progressives do not understand this. Progressives want real change and Trump
impeached, but these desires are at variance with one another.
Few, if any, of the impeach
Trump crowd are paying any attention to the fabricated case against Trump that
has taken the place of the Russiagate fabrication that failed. They could not
care less what the case is or whether it is a fabrication. Dislike of Trump
suffices.
Nevertheless, let’s look at
the fabricated case.
First of all, the alleged
whistleblower is not a legitimate whistleblower. He is Eric Ciaramella, a CIA
officer with a second-hand complaint who met with House Intelligence (sic)
chairman Adam Schiff a month ahead to orchestrate the event. Ciaramella served
on Obama’s staff when VP Joe Biden was point man for Ukraine. Ciaramella also
worked with CIA Director John Brennan, the architect of “Russiagate,” and with
a Democratic National Committee operative who encouraged Ukraine officials to
come up with dirt on President Trump.
All of this and more has
caused the “whistleblower” to withdraw from testifying.
Desperate for a substitute,
Democrats have come up with tainted career bureaucrats who favor military aid
to Ukraine and a hard line toward Russia. Bill Taylor a US diplomat in Ukraine
claims that Trump’s ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, said
that US military aid to Ukraine was conditional on Ukraine reopening the
government’s investigation into the Ukrainian company, Burisma, an
investigation that VP Joe Biden had closed down. Burisma is the company that
paid as much as $1.75 million to Biden and his son.
Taylor claims that another
bureaucrat, Tim Morrison, told him that Sondland communicated the “quid pro
quo” to an aide to Zelensky.
Sondland rejects the claims
by Taylor and Morrison.
A Ukrainian born rabid
anti-Russian US Army officer serving on the National Security Council,
Alexander Vindman, also offers two cents of unverified quid pro quo claims.
Vindman’s motive seems to be that President Trump is inclined to follow a
different policy toward Ukraine than Vindman prefers.
This is the extent of the
case against Trump. Amazingly weak considering that Ukrainian president
Zelensky has stated publicly that there was no quid pro quo and that the
released transcript of the Trump-Zelensky conversation shows no quid pro quo.
Now for the issue of the
alleged quid pro quo. It seems that everyone on both sides of the argument
takes for granted without a second of thought that if there was a quid pro quo,
there was an offense, possibly one sufficiently offensive to warrant
impeachment. This is utter ignorant nonsense.
Quid pro quos are endemic in
US foreign policy and always have been. The US government offered Ecuador
president Lenin Moreno a $4.2 billion IMF loan in exchange for revoking Julian
Assange’s asylum. Moreno took the deal. https://www.globalresearch.ca/assange-bought-4-2-billion-former-ecuadorian-president-confirms-imf-loan-exchange-assange/5674374
Washington offered the
Venezuelan military money to overthrow President Maduro. The military refused
the offer.
Dozens of examples come
readily to mind. Research would produce enough to fill a book.
What do you think the
sanctions are that the US president places on countries? They are punishments
that Washington imposes for not accepting Washington’s deal.
As for a quid pro quo deal
between the US executive branch and president of Ukraine, we have VP Joe
Biden’s boast that he got the Ukrainian prosecutor fired who was investigating
corruption in the firm that had purchased US protection by putting Biden’s son,
Hunter, on Burisma’s board. Joe Biden brags in front of the Council on Foreign
Relations that he gave the Ukrainian president 6 hours to fire the prosecutor
or forfeit $1 billion in US aid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCF9My1vBP4
As Biden was US Vice
President at the time and is currently the leading Democratic candidate for the
US presidential nomination, he is clearly guilty of what Trump is accused. Why
is only Trump subject to investigation? If an offense that is merely suspected
or alleged suffices for impeaching a president, why isn’t a known and admitted
and bragged about offense reason to disqualify Biden from being president?
One would think that a
question this obvious would be the topic of debate. But not a word from the
presstitutes, Democrats, or Republicans.
Finally, there is the
question of the whistleblower law. If this interpretation sent to me by a
reliable source is correct, there is no basis in law for the alleged
whistleblower complaint.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/09/30/the-whistleblower-complaint-is-an-orchestration-not-in-compliance-with-whistleblower-law/
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/09/30/the-whistleblower-complaint-is-an-orchestration-not-in-compliance-with-whistleblower-law/
/https://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/content/dam/thestar/news/canada/2021/09/25/huawei-executive-meng-wanzhou-receives-warm-welcome-upon-return-to-china/_1_meng_wanzhou_2.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.