{{featured_button_text}}
102418 opn Daniel Gardner mug

Daniel L. Gardner

The quid pro quo debates fluttering around Washington may sound familiar. The Wall Street Journal headline of Aug 3, 2016: “U.S. Sent Cash to Iran as Americans Were Freed” followed by the sub headline, “Obama administration insists there was no quid pro quo, but critics charge payment amounted to ransom.”

The grateful offer thanks

The lead sentence of that article: “WASHINGTON — The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.”

President Barack Obama’s action in January 2016 seems just a bit more concrete than President Donald Trump’s conversation with Ukrainian President Zelensky. In Obama’s case, something was exchanged regardless of whether it was quid pro quo. In Trump’s case, the only thing exchanged were words in a telephone conversation.

Awaiting those other reports

Nevertheless, last week House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for a vote to begin an open inquiry into impeaching Trump, receiving all but two votes from Democrats and no votes from Republicans.

Earlier this year Pelosi had said, “[I]mpeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country. And he’s (Trump) just not worth it.”

Register for more free articles
Stay logged in to skip the surveys
Surviving Washington maelstrom

Pelosi’s speech to House members in support of passing the resolution appeared to be historically and factually dyslectic. She loosely quoted Benjamin Franklin who had told citizens the founders had created “a republic.” Pelosi referred to our government as a “democracy” in every other reference in her speech. As House speaker, Pelosi is one place behind Vice President Mike Pence in line to the presidency. The Constitution never uses the word “democracy.”

Democrats have used “democracy” for years, avoiding using the word “republic.” In fact, Democrats have routinely called for changes in the Constitution to make us a democracy. (Think Electoral College.) Thankfully, the founders knew the difference and formed a constitutional republic.

Pelosi closed her comments to the house with this: “Hopefully, as we go forward with this, the clarity of purpose, the clarity of procedure, a clarity of fact, a clarity of truth about the truth – it's about the Constitution – we will do so in a way that brings people together that is healing rather than dividing. And, that is how we will honor our oath of office.”

Notwithstanding Pelosi’s apparent lack of clarity of our constitutional form of government, her hope that the impeachment inquiry over a telephone conversation between two national leaders will bring people together and will be “healing rather than dividing” defies rational thought.

Why are Democrats, the media and Washington’s establishment even more dead set on impeaching Trump now than they were on the day after the 2016 election? Two reasons: No one currently running for the Democratic nomination can win; and the Department of Justice as well as Inspector General Horowitz are on the verge of releasing initial findings of investigations into government corruption during the 2016 president election.

Democrats, media and the political establishment are prepared to distract voters’ attention away from all findings about the Obama administration and Democratic Party during the 2016 election. Their goals are to continue dividing Americans into identity groups and to remove Trump from office any way they can.

Be the first to know

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Daniel L. Gardner is a syndicated columnist who lives in Starkville, Miss. You may contact him at PJandMe2@gmail.com.

0
0
0
0
0

Load comments