Key Witness Shatters Nadler’s Impeachment Case: ‘Dangerous, Woefully Inadequate, Paucity of Evidence’

0
537

Jonathan Turley is a constitutional scholar well respected on both sides of the aisle. He was called as a key witness today in the ongoing saga that is the Dems doomed impeachment.

The Senate will not convict and Turley in his prepared remarks explains why in such simple language that even jerry Nadler can understand.

“One can oppose President Trump’s policies or actions but still conclude that the current legal case for impeachment is not just woefully inadequate, but in some respects, dangerous, as the basis for the impeachment of an American president,” Turley wrote.

Loading...

“The reference to the Hunter Biden deal with Burisma should never have occurred and is worthy of the criticism of President Trump that it has unleashed. However, it is not a case of bribery.”

“If Trump honestly believed that there was a corrupt arrangement with Hunter Biden that was not fully investigated by the Obama administration, the request for an investigation is not corrupt, notwithstanding its inappropriateness.”

Correct. Remember what we learned in the first round of hearings – that Barack Obama and his administration thought the Biden Burisma arrangement was troubling.

So troubling they coached people how to deal with it before their Senate confirmations. Believe me, they would not do that if there was no smoke there.

“President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come,” Turley will say.

“I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger.”

“If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president.”

“If we are to impeach a president for only the third time in our history, we will need to rise above this age of rage and genuinely engage in a civil and substantive discussion.”

Loading...