Impeach 45? . . . . but Why?

Only the people living in the cemetery do not know or have not heard that the Democrats are trying to build a case for impeaching the President of the United States and have been doing so since before he was even elected. We have heard very little for the last two years but "Impeach 45" from the Democrat Party. All sorts of attempts have been made at developing some kind of evidence that he has done something that so egregious that the only recourse is impeachment. All of these have failed. Presently they are trying to string him up (not allowed to use word "lynch" because it is offense to some people)  with some sort of "abuse of power" charge. This effort is taking place in a Democrat controlled committee of the House of Representatives chaired by the man who has been leading the charge to destroy the President. For the present I will say noting of the motives behind all this except to say that I believe the motives are purely political, not honorable and the process is disingenuous. I will note that the case against the President is being built around two things. 1. The use of a "quid pro quo" in negotiating with a foreign power; and, 2. The use of a private track in foreign policy. The process for putting all this together is the secrecy of closed doors. Here are some of my thoughts on all this . . . . . In thinking about the "Quid pro quo" thing I find myself wondering what all the hullabaloo is about. "Quid pro quo" simply means "this for that."  It is the very heart of every negotiation and diplomacy. The person (substitute business or country) with the strongest hand usually gets more of what they want than does the person with the weaker hand. My point is simply this: Just because there is a "quid pro quo" does not a crime create let alone a "high crime" or "misdemeanor." The second thing that confuses me is the hubbub about have a duel policy track. One, the official State Department track and a second independent Presidential track. This is nothing new. Presidents have been doing personal and independent diplomacy for longer than I can remember. It began when Washington favored a separate track using Hamilton's private track (Treasurer Secretary) over Jefferson's (Secretary of State) official track regarding the French Republic. Virtually every President since then has used dual tracks for diplomatic negations and relationships in general. Not only did they use dual tracts they engaged in personal diplomacy and negotiations. They did this with both domestics issues as well as international ones. It was a standing joke on the Hill that when Lyndon Johnson invited someone to the Ranch and while there said, "Lets take a walk" that whoever was on that walk was going to do whatever they were asked. Why was that the case . . . . . well, as the story goes, Johnson knew where all the skeletons were buried."  You can only imagine what the quid pro quo was then. The third thing that puzzles me is the use of closed door meetings in the House of Representatives for non-national security matters. This is the "People's House" and it appears to me that that is the last place where closed door meetings would be held. This practice hearkens back to the old "Cloak Room" meetings where things were decided before a committee "rubber stamped" the cloak room decisions. Secrecy allows for all sorts of shenanigans and wrong doing. With the exception of "surprise parties" for birthdays, anniversaries and planned retirements very little done behind closed doors is wholesome. Everything that goes on behind closed doors hinges upon the integrity of the people conducting the meetings. However, I have learned from experience that behind closed doors you learn that public integrity and private integrity are two entirely different things. Besides, decisions made behind closed doors are always subject to skepticism on the part of those not in the closed meeting. This process is illegal for City Councils, School Boards and all kinds of public bodies. The single exception is for personnel matters involving people who work for those governmental entities. If the sauce is good for the gander then it is good for the goose. From where I sit there is nothing of significance in any of this that would lead me to think "Impeach 45." It is time for the House and all their allies in the intelligence community (deep state) to lay down their swords and let the people decide come November 2020. If we have learned anything in this grand experiment call The United States of America it is the voice of the people that matters. We don't need the professional politicians and the bureaucrats to use spin and hyperbole to shape our thinking. Just lay all the cards on the table and we'll let you know what we think and what we expect. We need a really bright shot of daylight on Washington. To paraphrase Henry II,  "What miserable drones and traitors have we nurtured and promoted in the People's House who treat the office of President with such shameful contempt." Will no one rid us of these turbulent congressmen?"  I guess that will be "We The People" come the general election in November 2020

Impeachment or Coup d'etat

I heard a Democrat Congressman say that the minority (meaning Republicans) are "Darn lucky these hearings aren't public" implying that, as Jack Nicholson said in the movie "A Few Good Men," . . . . . “You can't handle the truth!" He seems to suggest that if we had heard what he has heard in secret we could not handle it. I say, let me be the judge of how I handle what has been said in the secret place. It is not the witness’s testimony I fear . . . . .  it is the second hand reporting of that testimony that he and Adam Schiff decide to let me hear that I fear.

Well, to him I say, the truth may be hard and painful but it is only the truth, the whole truth and nothing except what is true that will set us free from the grip of half truths.
At the prompting of Dr. A.O. Collins I penned the following on the inside cover of my Journal. . . . . .

From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth
From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth
O God of truth deliver us.
From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth
From the laziness that is content with half truth
O God of truth deliver us.

Adam Schiff has conducted his committee meetings as if it were a Grand Jury procedure allowing only his witnesses to testify and to do that in secret meetings closed to both the public and the Congress. His first reason for secrecy was the protection of a whistle blowers’ identity. He has since marshaled several other weaker reasons. In my view and many other Constitutional authorities his whole process is a violation of the Constitutional process for impeachment. I would add that because of his own clearly and publicly stated bias against the President and his own public record of lying about the matters before his committee disqualify him to chair let alone judge the maters he claims to be investigating.

I would remind Congressman Adam Schiff and the others after his ilk of the words of Jesus regarding testimony, light and darkness . . . . . "This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil."

Darkness hides and conceals what is happening. That is why the thief comes under cover of darkness and not in the noonday light. So also does the conniver who desires to protect his own complicity in evil doing. I have seen and heard men say things in closed meetings that they would never say in public because of blow back and damage to their reputation.

Later Jesus made it clear that the actions and deeds done in secret will one day be subject to the bright light of truth and revelation. He categorically stated, "There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, and nothing hidden that will not be made known. What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs."

Many a life has been destroyed by the actions of men hiding behind closed doors. Let your "Yea" be "Yea" and your "Nay' be "Nay." Speak the truth as you understand and believe it to be but do so in the open where your testimony can be examined by the people whose lives are affected. Speak the truth. Speak the truth in public where it can be heard and tested. Speak the truth in love and without rancor or ill will toward those who truth spoken harms or vindicates.

Trust me, the scripture does not err on any level or application when it says, "and you shall know the Truth and the Truth shall set you free."  Might I suggest that it is fear of the public “knowing the whole truth” that has driven these Congressional hearings behind closed doors.

A word about Whistle Blowers and secrecy. When Jeremiah purposed not to speak God’s word for fear of retribution he finally stated, “But if I say, ‘I will not mention his word or speak anymore in his name,’ his word is in my heart like a fire, a fire shut up in my bones. I am weary of holding it in; indeed, I cannot.” 

In a like manner the information that a whistle blower feels must be made know would be like a fire in their bones and they must speak, secrecy or no secrecy.  The importance of their message outweighs any possible personal repercussions. If you name them then take ownership of your testimony before them. The accused has the right to confront their accusers.  When it comes to material things secrecy may not be harmful but when it involves actions that will forever change an individual life, or the lives of many lives or the nation secrecy is anathema.  It opens the doors to treachery. When secrecy is imposed not only is the witness’s testimony called into question but those who judge the veracity of his testimony are called into question as well.

So if the Democrats insist on holding hearings on undoing a Constitutionally prescribed Presidential election let everything be done in a fitting, orderly and open way so that the people who elected that President can see and know whether or not the facts justify the action and hold the perpetrators accountable. It is we the people who will decide whether justice has been served or a cloakroom coup has been executed but we must have all the information and facts to judge fairly and vote appropriately.

This whole affair began prior to the election and has continued nonstop since 2016 and in my view when taken in its full context is nothing short of a coup d'etat.