Why would President Trump want to cooperate with Ukraine in a criminal investigation? For Democrats/Socialists/Communists and the media (I know: I repeat myself) the only possible reason could be to improperly, certainly illegally, harm innocent Joe Biden and his saintly family in order to increase his chances of reelection, and of course, because Trump is the locus of all evil in the universe. There is, however, at least one more possibility, as DC Whispers reports:
DOH! Did You Know There’s a Treaty Between the USA & Ukraine Regarding Cooperation For Prosecuting Crimes?
My goodness. It was passed when Joe Biden was a member of the U.S. Senate and then signed by then-President Bill Clinton.
[It’s] A comprehensive treaty agreement that allows cooperation between both the United States and Ukraine in the investigation and prosecution of crimes.
That’s right, gentle readers, and it was a Democrat president that signed it, and the Senate, including Joe Biden, that ratified it:
“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”
WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
The PDF of the treaty is here. Keep in mind it was President Zelensky, elected on the promise to end corruption, that raised the issue of the investigation into Burisma Holdings, not President Trump. It’s now clear President Trump was doing no more than honoring a treaty between the US and Ukraine.
But what about the whistleblower? That transcript was also released on Thursday, 09-26-19. The primary allegations are:
* Supposed White House officials that heard the call were “deeply disturbed” by it.
No doubt deep state operatives in the White House are “deeply disturbed” by Donald Trump’s mere existence. An anonymous “whistleblower’s” characterization of the emotional state of others—even assuming this isn’t a complete fabrication—is evidence of, and proof of, nothing.
* President Trump pressured President Zelensky “to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid.”
The transcript of the conversation between the two presidents makes clear President Trump did not pressure President Zelsnsky to do anything, a fact confirmed by Zelensky himself. Nor did anything in the conversation pertain to a “relection bid.”
* The White House tried to “restrict access’ to records of the call.”
The attempt to “restrict access” was apparently unsuccessful, as the conversation transcript and the whistleblower’s complaint have been made public in record time.
* [Diplomat Kurt] “Volker and U.S. European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland gave Zelensky advice “about how to ‘navigate’ the demands that the President had made of [Zelensky].”
There were no demands to navigate.
Clearly, reality has overtaken the whistleblower’s allegations and rendered them moot. He/she was wrong, and their allegations are false. The whistleblower’s complaint is here.
But we’re not quite done, gentle readers. What of the acting Director of National Intelligence’s testimony before Congress? According to Fox News,
Acting DNI Joseph Maguire blew the Washington Posts contention that he threatened to resign if President Trump didn’t allow him to testify before Congress out of the water as he testified before Congress. He explicitly said he made no such threat for any reason.
His testimony was yet another moral quandary for D/S/Cs As usual, they went full immiral. He noted the “Whistleblower’s” information was second hand, and cautioned about rushing to judgment on impeachment based on second hand information.
Democrats impugned Maguire’s character, embarrassing themselves as usual. Unfortunately, they’re completely incapable of feeling embarrassment or shame, a prime example being Adam Schiff, who read into the record his own version of the transcript of the conversation between the presidents. Rightly called out for his serial lying, he claimed parts of it were a parody.
This is not, however, merely Schiff behaving irresponsibly and stupidly, as usual.
For the time being, this appears to be what it almost certainly is: a desperate, political attack designed to cover up Democrat crimes. More, I’m sure, to come.