One Impeachment Argument: Holding Ukraine Aid Put US Troops at Risk

| January 21, 2020 | 21 Comments

The impeachment trial starts in the Senate today. The Democrat-dominated House sent House Managers to “prosecute” the case. One of these house managers is a veteran. Representative Jason Crow from Colorado will approach this from the “Withholding Ukraine aid placed US troops at risk” angle.

When Nancy Pelosi chose her seven members, she had “variety” in mind. Crow was chosen partly due to his veteran status. Both sides are prepared to argue their case.

From military.com:

Crow also said he would argue for witnesses to be called to back up the two articles of impeachment alleging abuse of power and obstruction of Congress by Trump.

Trump “has said he has done nothing wrong, so let’s have the people that are in the best position to confirm that come in and testify before the U.S. Senate,” Crow said.

In a statement earlier this month after he was named as an impeachment manager, Crow said that “while there is no map for the challenges we face, my oath to support and defend the Constitution has guided me for years, and will continue to guide me during this trial.”

As an impeachment manager, I will approach the process with the dignity and seriousness that it deserves, and advocate for a full and fair trial,” Crow added.

Military Times has the article here.

Category: Politics

Comments (21)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Fyrfighter says:

    Crow said that “while there is no map for the challenges we face, my oath to support and defend the Constitution has guided me for years, and will continue to guide me during this trial.”

    And as a resident of Colorado, that statement right there proves he’s a liar (well, that and the fact that he declared himself a democrat…)

  2. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    Watching those D-rats trying to do this rabbit-shit of an impeachment is like watching twelve monkeys trying to fuck a football all at once! This Jason Crow they claim is a Veteran, what did he do, was he another mouse-fuck fobbit like But-googley?

  3. 5th/77th FA says:

    I would look forward to a real trial. One where the Biden’s and everyone else involved in the Ukraine Gas Company was forced to testify, under oath. Too bad that won’t happen. We will continue to be forced to listen to the screeching of all of these howler monkeys who are just pissed that the Bitch of Benghazi didn’t get “her turn.”

    I’m really just sick and tired of what the congress critters in the District of Criminals have been doing for the last 3 years. We pay those mofos 174K a year, plus bennies. Do your effing jobs!

  4. Ex-PH2 says:

    Why is it that Schiff always has those little spots of white in his eyes?

    It makes him look like he’s possessed, like Linda Blair in ‘The Exorcist’. Oh, wait…. Isn’t Pelosi starting to wear red lately? Hmmmm…..

  5. UpNorth says:

    I’d like for Jason Crow to find the sections of the U.S. Code that outlines that “Abuse of Power” and “Obstruction of Congress” rise to the level of a “High Crime” or “misdemeanor”. I’ve looked every which way I can, and can find not a single article, section or paragraph that does that.
    Abuse of power seems to be winning an election against a democrat, and obstruction of Congress seems to be doing what the President was elected to do.

    • LC says:

      Wasn’t Clinton impeached for the ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ of … obstruction of Congress? Surely that’s precedent, no?

      If you think that was also bullshit, hey, I can understand a principled view.

      • AW1Ed says:

        “October 8, 1998, when the United States House of Representatives voted to commence impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton, the 42nd president of the United States, for “high crimes and misdemeanors”. The specific charges against Clinton were lying under oath and obstruction of justice. The charges stemmed from a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against Clinton by Paula Jones and from Clinton’s testimony denying that he had engaged in a sexual relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.”

        Ref: Wiki

        Perjury and obstruction of justice are crimes, unlike obstruction of Congress.

        • rgr769 says:

          Also, let’s not forget there were several instances of perjury by Clinton. He lied under oath in his deposition and in his grand jury testimony. Moreover, he suborned perjury by having his minions persuade others to give false testimony and sign false affidavits to cover up his improper conduct.

      • SFC D says:

        Clinton was tried for perjury and witness tampering. Trump is on trial for not being Hillary and saying no to congress. Yeah… it’s exactly the same.

      • rgr769 says:

        Uh, in a word, no. There is no historical lie you progs won’t believe if it serves your political objective.

  6. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    It will be interesting to see if the questions surrounding how the House subpoenas did not allow witnesses the advice of agency counsel only personal counsel are handled in the Senate.

    I remain fascinated by the process, if also disgusted by the events surrounding said process.

  7. HT3 '83-'87 says:

    Withholding? I think they mean delaying funds since Ukraine did receive the funds unlike they did during Barry Bananas reign. My wife is of Ukrainian decent, I was married in a Ukrainian Orthodox Church where half the ceremony was in Ukrainian, and many in attendance still had connection to стара країна, and let me tell you they are very glad that Donald Trump is President and committed to sending lethal aid to stop the Russian invasion.
    This is nothing more than the second coup attempt which will fizzle like the Mueller Report…remember when that was the nail in Trump’s coffin.
    Read Schweizer’s new book on how The Bidens cashed in while he was VP.

    • thebesig says:

      Also, the delay in aid had something to do with President Trump raising the BS flag with regard to our allies not providing more substantial help to Ukraine… Despite the fact that this was occurring in Europe.

      During the phone call, there was no mention of aid being done in exchange for an investigation.

  8. SFC D says:

    So… if Trump endangered U.S. troops by “withholding” military aid to the Ukraine, how exactly did the previous president’s* aid package of blankets and MRE’s protect the troops? Was it something along the way that “Fast and Furious” enhanced border security and crippled the Sinaloa cartel?

    *Lowercase p was purely intentional and insulting.

  9. timactual says:

    I listened to part of the proceedings today. Very amusing. It demonstrates why both politicians and lawyers are held in such low regard. Part of the impeachment “managers'” argument is that the House Democrats (mostly lawyers) were too incompetent to put together a sufficient case.

    I look forward to more laughter.

  10. Ex-PH2 says:

    Anyone besides me remember when Maxine ‘the Mouth’ Waters was snarling “impeach impeach impeach” at the very beginning of Trump’s term? She denied it, of course, but there it was on video recordings, all over the place.

    Those dumbocrats have spent three long years looking for some reason to get Trump fired because their candidate didn’t get the job. I’m waiting for the day they implode and disappear into a black hole of howling, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Never thought I’d see middle-aged adults throw such a group tantrum.

  11. Roh-Dog says:

    Does anyone have a link or suggestions on recalling Congresscritters and Senators?
    My ‘Rep’ voted to advance this pile of crap and I know how Da Nang Dick and Guns Scare Me Murphy are going to vote.
    After last the last admin, what was supposedly done aint even in the same hemisphere

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *