Ukraine Official Casts Doubts on "Quid Pro Quo" Claim
When the House launches an impeachment inquiry into a president, it's serious. We should take it seriously, in addition to waiting for facts and evidence to come in before launching blind condemnation or blind defense of the president in question (see WATCH: Adam Schiff Reads from Ukraine 'Transcript.' Which He Pulled Out of His Ass! and WATCH: Tulsi Gabbard Thinks Democrats are Wrong to Push Impeachment). That said, here's a report from a Ukraine official to put on the pile of evidence that destroys the Democrats' wet dreams of impeaching Trump.
An unnamed Ukrainian official said that Kiev was not made aware that the U.S. suspended security funds until a month after President Trump's call with his Ukranian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky, which calls into question the whistleblower's account and Democrats' arguments that there was a quid pro quo for the aid.
Well crap. There goes the main thrust of this entire deal, no?
The official told The New York Times that Zelensky's government was unaware about the aid issue until a month after Trump's July 25 phone call in which he discussed Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
The whistleblower complaint – citing U.S. officials – claimed that officials in Kiev were aware that the military aid could be in jeopardy in early August, but the whistleblower admitted to not knowing "how or when they learned of it."
A serious charge needs a serious and thorough investigation, yes. A president needs to have committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Whether finding the reasonable doubt part is possible in this political climate, the jury is still out. Bill Clinton clearly committed perjury. The only thing clear about Donald Trump is that he doesn't always think before he speaks, nor does he ever know when to stop talking. While frustrating, that's not a crime. Sometimes it is funny, though.
But if we're talking reasonable doubt? A whistleblower without actual first-hand information, and this claim on funding timelines, if true, destroys the idea of quid pro quo. Making it rather difficult to insist there was a quid pro quo. Which was rather the "scandal" of this whole thing. Thoughts and prayers for Democrats this morning.