The Disorienting Defense of Mr. Trump

Focus for a moment on the defense that Mr. Trump cannot receive a fair hearing unless the whistle-blower is identified and compelled to testify. Suppose an anonymous person calls 911 to report a crime in progress. The police respond and catch a wrongdoer in the act and arrest him. Applying Republican logic, the charge must be dismissed and the criminal released unless the police can, somehow, find the caller and make him available as a witness for the defense so he can be questioned  about whether he made up the story because he disliked the defendant. Mr. Trump's other "defenses" are equally plausible.

Fox News Coverage of Trump Political Rallies

Tonight, after a day of multiple major news stories, all of them bad for Donald Trump and the Republicans, Sean Hannity devoted virtually all of his hour-long Fox program to televising a Trump political rally in Louisiana. Hannity had zero coverage of Republican election losses, just released transcripts of impeachment witnesses, the Sondland flip flop, adverse court rulings, Barr's refusal to declare Trump innocent, and the opening statement of the prosecutor in the Roger Stone perjury trial. And that is only a partial list of blockbuster news that Hannity missed or chose to ignore.

This same scenario has been repeated several times in recent weeks; Hannity opting to have his program pre-empted by Trump political rallies featuring long, rambling, profane diatribes by the President, promoting local candidates and highlighting his own worthiness for re-election and by short pitches from the local politicos.

Since this coverage is patently political, not to be confused with time set aside by networks for important pronouncements by presidents on topics of national concern, my question: is this not an in kind contribution by the Fox Network to the Trump campaign; has it been reported as such and is it permissible under FCC regulations and campaign finance laws?

Change of Republican Tactics Makes No Sense

With the evidence conclusively proving that Donald Trump demanded political dirt in exchange for continued aid to the Ukraine (the oft-cited "quid pro quo"), and the process of the investigation having been made more formal and transparent,  Republicans have pivoted to a new defense made up of two components. First, claim that Mr. Trump's misconduct does not amount to an impeachable offense. Second, attack the character and credibility of the whistle-blower and of the witnesses whose testimony  described Mr.Trump's wrongdoing.

The first argument is absurd on its face. If demanding political assistance from a foreign state as a condition of continued military assistance is not a corrupt abuse of power constituting an impeachable offense then no misconduct can ever warrant impeachment. 

Neither Mr. Trump nor any of his defenders have cited any misstatement of fact by the whistle-blower or any of the witnesses who testified before the House Intelligence Committee. Indeed, the transcript of the telephone call released by the President corroborates their statements. Thus, the identity of the whistle-blower, his motivation and credibility is utterly irrelevant. Similarly, the uncontradicted testimony of the witnesses cannot be undone by besmirching their character or discounting their estimable record of non-partisan public service. It is time for Republican officials to put the nation's welfare ahead of their personal interests.

Trump's Story of Terrorist's Death

Some make light of President Trump's fabricated account of the killing of al-Baghdadi, branding disbelievers nitpickers who are unwilling to give Mr. Trump his due. They excuse the president's continual and documented departure from fact as simply Trump being Trump.

The fact that a majority of Americans mistrust the president's credibility is a serious threat to the functioning of a democracy, where power is ceded by the many to a few. From his patently false denials of misconduct to his misdescription of storm tracks, Mr. Trump has demonstrated an inability to separate fact from fiction.  That should be a disqualifying character trait for any leader, let alone the President of the United States.

Republican Attacks on the Character of Witnesses

Nearly every day a patriotic American courageously exposes presidential corruption by testifying in Congress about Donald Trump's shakedown of the Ukrainian president to extort political assistance. As each of these truthtellers comes forward, the media recounts his or her impeccable background and commitment to non-partisan national  service. 

Surely, talking heads conjecture, the character and honesty of these sterling witnesses dare not be impugned. After all, they include career diplomats and high ranking officials who have served under both political parties, a wounded and decorated military officer and even an ultraconservative appointed by Mr. Trump. Nonetheless, the stellar reputations of these witnesses has not insulated them from attacks by the Republican hierarchy and the far right media.

Their dedicated service and sacrifice have not deterred assaults on their bona fides or integrity. They have been excoriated as faceless, Deep State bureaucrats, disloyal immigrants who may be engaged in espionage and deranged Trump haters. This baseless and self-interested disparagement of  conscientious citizens is almost as despicable and damaging to our democracy as the misconduct  it is intended to disguise. 

Sean Hannity's Alternative Universe

The alternative universe inhabited by Fox anchor Sean Hannity grows weirder each evening. A parade of patriotic public servants have testified before Congress, nailing down with precise and corroborated testimony the abuse of power, corruption and inexplicable obeisance to Putin of President Donald Trump, Hannity basically ignores these facts except to cast an occasional stone at some of the witnesses.. Instead, he breathlessly alerts his audience to the unfolding scandal of the “non-whistle blower” who is about to be outed as another Deep State conspirator with undisclosed ties to the “cowardly, congenital liar “, Rep. Adam Schiff. According to Hannity, Mr. Schiff is conducting a Soviet style inquisition to take down the President.

More disturbing, Mr. Hannity’s fellow travelers in this fantasy world include congressional leaders Kevin McCarthy and Steve Scaliese and the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, Attorney General William Barr.

This latest scandal will take its place in Hannity’s pantheon of earth shattering transgressions, which include Barack Obama’s cavorting with terrorists, the Benghazi debacle, the Steele Dossier, Hillary Clinton’s emails and the infiltration of the FBI and the CIA by radicals like Robert Mueller, James Comey and John Brennan. Hannity warns, with increasing crescendo, that America, as we know it, will be no more unless “you, we the People” take action against the Trump-hating, out of control radical Left and its allies in the “Fake News, lying media. Lewis Carrol has been outdone . We are living in a modern Wonderland.

Senator Lindsey Graham's Shifting Standards

Senator Lindsey Graham is a chameleon; he changes colors and postures from day to day, administration to administration.

Senator Graham declared recently that if President Donald Trump conditioned financial aid to the Ukraine upon receipt of assistance to his campaign, that would be grounds for impeachment. Now that the evidence establishes a “quid pro quo”, Sen. Graham no longer finds that exchange offensive.

When Bill Clinton was president Sen. Graham considered abuse of power an impeachable offense. Now that Donald Trump is the abuser Sen. Graham no longer finds it a sufficient ground for impeachment. When Special Counsel Kenneth Starr privately interviewed witnesses during his investigation of Mr. Clinton, Sen. Graham  was not troubled. When a congressional committee now proceeds in the same manner, in its inquiry concerning Donald Trump, Sen. Graham is outraged and has moved to condemn the process as unconstitutional and a violation of Due Process.

Senator Graham is either a man of many minds or a pliable tool of the president. Neither condition befits a United States senator.