I hope we can all agree with the following statement: It is not a good thing for foreign governments or entities to be involved with our elections. If you disagree with that statement, it’s best that you move on because this article has nothing of value for you.
Essentially, what I’m saying is that we don’t want the Russians, Koreans, Chinese, Ukrainians, Swahilis, or any other non-American citizen influencing the outcome of our voting. We want to elect our own people—thank you!
Therefore, to invite or encourage a foreign government or entity to become involved in our elections is also a bad thing. President Trump has, by his own admission and according to our own eyes and ears, done that. During his campaign, we all heard him invite the Russians to “find Hillary’s emails.” He was clear during a TV interview when asked directly and confirmed he would accept foreign interference. We all read the transcript of his phone conversation with the Ukrainian president and asked him to investigate Joe Biden. We also listened over the roar of the helicopter as he encouraged the Chinese also to investigate Biden. There is no doubt Trump sought foreign interference in our election. His supporters don’t even dispute this fact. He did!
Now, here’s the point of the entire article. Pay attention to what I say next. If Trump is not impeached for what he has already done, what is to keep him from doing the same thing on a larger scale?
What if he wants to recruit 100,000 Chinese to come over here to knock on doors and distribute flyers during the campaign? How do we keep him from asking Saudi Arabia to spend $500 million on Facebook ads? Who’s to say it’s wrong to ask the Russians to ramp up their phone banks from last time?
If he’s not impeached, we are telling him that it’s fine, go ahead, keep asking for help. I’m assuming because you’re still reading that you agreed with my initial statement that it’s wrong for foreign governments or entities to be involved in our elections. In this case, the only way to keep it from happening again is to get rid of the one who thinks it’s fine. How else can it be stopped?
I need to add a word about the one defense the President and his followers offer on his behalf—there was no quid pro quo. Since you’re reading an article titled, “Impeachment for Dummies,” I will provide the English meaning of that Latin phrase—”a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something,” or more simply, “something for something.” The argument is that since the President didn’t promise anything in return for the assistance, there was nothing wrong with simply asking.
I need to say two things. First, the idea that guilt for inviting foreign interference into our elections requires a quid pro quo is ridiculous. Who made up that rule? If foreign interference is wrong, then inviting that interference is wrong, even without promising anything in return. That’s such a specious argument that I don’t know why we’re spending time responding.
Second, the President of the United States can’t ask for anything without some type of quid pro quo implied. Think for a minute about the situation with Ukraine. For years they have depended on American support for their existence and safety. They need our money in order to purchase our weapons. It’s unlikely they would survive as a nation without us.
They are checking the mailbox every day, expecting a check for $400 million from the U.S. It doesn’t come, and they have no leverage other than hat in hand begging. Even if he didn’t know the money was being deliberately withheld, the President of Ukraine knows he needs Trump’s favor. When the President asks for an investigation into Joe Biden, the quid pro quo is evident, even if he hasn’t read the book, “Diplomacy for Dummies.”
Let me illustrate it like this. You operate an appliance business that is doing ok, but you’re in the middle of a cash-flow shortage. You meet with the president of the bank where you’ve always done business and explain your situation. He says he wants to help, but he needs to speak with the Board before giving approval. During the conversation, he mentions that his wife is fascinated by those new refrigerators that keep track of your grocery lists. He doesn’t ask for one, but you know if your guys happened to deliver one to his house, your loan is more likely to be approved.
As Trump would say, there was no quid pro quo, but the reality is, there was a quid pro quo.
The impeachment has nothing to do with the identity of the whistleblower, the legality of the Russian interference in 2016, or any of the other irresponsible stunts Trump has done the past few years. It’s about eliminating foreign interference in our elections and eliminating those who encourage it to happen.