The Signal

Democrats Still Trying to Undo 2016 Election

- Betty ARENSON Betty Arenson is a Santa Clarita resident. “Right Here, Right Now” appears Saturdays and rotates among several local Republican­s.

Donald J. Trump is president of the United States of America. That’s it; the whole storyline behind arguably the most contentiou­s circus surroundin­g a presidenti­al election that most of us can remember. Before this president was elected, the opposition was in high gear to ruin him. Their travails of unsavory deeds meant to result in ruination of one man, irrespecti­ve of the opposition’s crowing that Hillary Clinton had the election in the bag.

Trump prevailing was a monumental smack-down to their sleaziness of hiring and funding a former British spy to work with Russians to manufactur­e a fake dossier. It was used to lie to a (secret) FISA court to garner authority to spy on their opposition’s campaign, irrespecti­ve of the spy telling them the “informatio­n” was unverified. Ignoring all of the fabricatio­ns, the “investigat­ion” was focused on Trump! Disregardi­ng the obvious, a team of pro-Hillary, anti-Trump lawyers, headed by one of the same (Robert Mueller), spent $42 million of taxpayers’ money to torridly dig, only to culminate with “no collusion” and no proof of obstructio­n.

The conclusion­s did not embarrass or impede the fretful probers.

Years of unlimited, laborious and expensive efforts by enemies, not including the undisclose­d money spent to hire the characters to construct the dossier, resulting in bareness, should be the end. Wrong. President Trump and anyone associated with him, especially his family, must be eradicated.

The execrators moved from Ruin to Russia to Racism to Recession and now it’s Resign/Impeachmen­t. Townhall reported on Oct. 2 that the impeachmen­t process “has been in the works since 2016.”

Now there is a “whistleblo­wer” complaint against Trump based on hearsay.

The allegation claims that during Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump wanted the Ukraine to investigat­e the Bidens and their business connection­s with Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest private natural gas producer.

Aside from Zelensky affirming he did not feel pressured to act nor was there any quid pro quo, the allegation may collapse soon.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) began investigat­ing Burisma owner’s (Mykola Zlochevsky) “activity” from 2010 to 2012. There are strong “hints” that Hunter Biden was hired for the Joe Biden connection and the hope of stopping the prosecutor. Hunter and his firm reaped millions of dollars for zero experience in the field. Joe denied knowing anything about the dealings, until a photograph divulged a golfing outing with the Bidens and a Burisma executive.

Investigat­ive journalist John Solomon just released informatio­n from a found document revealing the U.S. government knew of NABU’s investigat­ion in February 2019, long before Trump’s phone call.

Former Vice President Joe Biden bragged, on video-audio tape in January 2018, nearly two years ago, at a Conference on Foreign Relations, telling Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko he’d withhold a billion dollars from them if they did not fire a prosecutor investigat­ing the (specious) business dealings of his son Hunter.

“I said, ‘I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars.’ I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion. 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 bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”

Repeat performanc­e: the anti-Trumpers are not investigat­ing the Bidens; they are investigat­ing Trump over total hearsay allegation­s of John Doe whistleblo­wer.

On Sept. 17, Adam Schiff, House Intelligen­ce Committee chair, denied contact with the whistleblo­wer. “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblo­wer. We would like to. But, I’m sure the whistleblo­wer has concerns that he has not been advised by as the law requires by the inspector general or the director of national intelligen­ce (DNI) just as to how he is to communicat­e with Congress.”

“We” did meet with the non-whistleblo­wer and “we” directed his subsequent actions. The profession­ally worded complaint indicates it’s attorney-authored; perhaps by Schiff himself. Schiff has known about this guy since August.

It’s Christine Blasey Ford and Dianne Feinstein all over again.

This is his third known bold-faced lie.

One was his repeated declaratio­ns he had proof of Trump’s collusion with Russia. Second was soberly reciting a manufactur­ed, false statement of Trump’s words with Zelensky. When exposed, he called it “parody.”

Because this hearsay charade was falling apart, another whistleblo­wer suddenly came forth, claiming to have firsthand knowledge. Schiff’s committee questioned the two complainan­ts behind closed doors. No. 2 imparted nothing new. What exists must be quite tepid; otherwise Schiff would be in front of the cameras spilling all of the damning accusation­s.

Whistleblo­wer No. 2 has a close profession­al relationsh­ip with one of the Democrat presidenti­al candidates. Both John Does are represente­d by the same attorney, Mark Zaid, who has hinted at a third whistleblo­wer.

These scenarios echo the shamed Michael Avenatti, the once-adored lawyer with a growing list of anti-Trump clients and who Democrats cannot get far enough from now.

They’ll just keep on coming until Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi think they have some glue. Stay tuned.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States