Media Desperately Trying to Help Democrats Convince the Public Trump is Guilty

Ringleaders Adam Schiff (D-CA), Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) have made the 2019 impeachment drive against President Trump look remarkably similar to a pack of howler monkeys trying to do something unmentionable to a doorknob. The Washington Post is really worried about this. Because Schiff, Pelosi and Nadler have botched the job so badly, the Post’s media columnist has just published an article describing how journalists can help convince the voters to support impeachment.

Being a magnanimous person, I’d like to help! To get the voters to support impeachment, all you have to do is convince them to believe in three things which are not real.

First, you have to get the public to believe that the definition of “bribery” that has been in use for thousands of years, now means something different. Here’s what “bribery” means using Adam Schiff’s Get Trump Impeachment Logic:

Trump told the Ukrainian president that he couldn’t have military foreign aid unless Ukraine investigated the shady Biden family’s insanely lucrative deal with a corrupt gas company. If Ukraine complied with that (which the crooks actually did not comply with), then that would be a “gift” to Donald Trump in the form of an undeclared campaign contribution from a foreign power.

The old definition of “bribery” appears in the Book of Leviticus in the Bible. That’s the definition that has been in use for thousands of years in civilized countries. It’s a really old definition, so most normal people are familiar with the concept. In Leviticus, if you give a judge a “gift” in order to secure a favorable outcome for yourself in a court case, that’s bribery.

The gifts back then were probably along the lines of a goat or a nice scarf, whereas today the gifts are usually in the form of cash, flat-screen TVs, or authentic merchandise from Michael Jackson’s estate. Under the new Schiff definition of bribery, you just have to believe that a bribe now involves no exchange of anything of actual value, and one party doesn’t hold up its end of the bargain.

Second, you have to get the public to believe that it is somehow a crime to investigate candidates who are running for public office. Democrats are alleging that when Trump – as the head of the Executive branch which is in charge of the US Department of Justice – asked Ukraine to investigate the possibility of the Biden family’s alleged corruption, it was a crime.

This isn’t just insane. It’s “Oops, I smoked too much crack on my lunch break” insane.

If someone is running for political office, you can’t investigate actions that they took in a foreign country? Huh? By that logic, should we stop doing background checks on employees before we hire them to drive school buses?

It seems like only yesterday when Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh went through seven different FBI background checks before his confirmation.

Come to think of it, the Russian collusion “investigation” was started by the Obama administration in December of 2015 and ran through the entirety of 2016. Wasn’t Donald Trump a candidate that whole time? He was investigated while running for office. But that’s totally different!

The third thing that you must get the public to believe is that it is illegal for President Donald Trump to do the exact same thing that every previous president since World War II has done. Schiff, Pelosi, and Nadler need everyone to believe that it is (now) an impeachable offense for a president to (A) withhold information from Congress, and (B) ask for a quid pro quo when negotiating with foreign powers.

Never mind that a bunch of impeachment witnesses have now testified under oath that there was no quid pro quo with Ukraine. Let’s just pretend there was. Even if the Ukraine phone call happened exactly as Democrats claim it did, it would not be a crime. Every president since World War II has asked for political favors in exchange for doling out American taxpayer money to foreign countries.

And the Executive branch cannot withhold information from Congress? Really?

If that’s true, who do we impeach over the Kennedy assassination documents that are still safely tucked away in a box somewhere? Or the Operation Fast & Furious documents, or the 9/11 documents on Saudi Arabia, or the Whitewater billing records? I could go on and on. But now it is somehow illegal for the Trump administration to drag its feet on having employees testify in front of Operation Monkey Doorknob?

That’s all you have to do, journalists! Convince the public to believe in those three fairytales, and you’ll increase support for impeachment.

Most Popular

These content links are provided by Both and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More

Most Popular
Sponsor Content