It was reported back on September 6, that Trump was withholding military aid to Ukraine, in an effort to compel the new president of Ukraine to meddle in the 2020 election via a mud slinging campaign against Joe Biden, via his son Hunter. As you recall, Hunter Biden once served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, which was investigated by Ukraine. Then-vice president Joe Biden, along with several other senior Western officials, urged the dismissal of the prosecutor who investigated the firm, because he was accused of blocking anti-corruption measures.

Then Wednesday, news of the whistleblower complaint broke, revealing extensive phone conversations between Donald Trump and the president of Ukraine, on this topic, and Thursday, Michael Atkinson, inspector general of the intelligence community, testified in a closed door session of congress for three hours and declined to disclose the specifics of the whistleblower complaint, claiming that he was “not authorized to do so.” if the Inspector General is not authorized to do so, who might be? Reportedly, “He was being excruciatingly careful about the language he used,” according to the Washington Post.

Then Friday, Joe Biden chimed in.

This is turning into a real showdown. Dan Rather chimed in as well.

This is about as simple as it gets. This is the line of demarcation between holding Trump and the most corrupt iteration of the GOP ever, accountable for their actions, or letting our system of government stay broken and become more broken still. The spinmeisters are at work, calling this “Russian Hoax 2.0” the sequel to the Witch Hunt.

The bedrock of the constitution is at stake here. We need to see the details of that complaint. Adam Schiff is right. Real Clear Politics:

The whole point of the whistleblower statute is not only to encourage those to report problems, abuses, violations of laws, but also to have a legal mechanism to do so and not to disclose classified information — because there’s no other remedy,” Schiff told reporters after a closed-door meeting. “That whole purpose is being frustrated here because the Director of National Intelligence has made the unprecedented decision not to share the complaint with Congress.”

REP. ADAM SCHIFF: We know that the Department of Justice has been involved in the decision to withhold that information from Congress. We do not know, because we cannot get an answer to the question, about whether the White House is also involved in preventing this information from coming to Congress.

We do not have the complaint.

We do not though whether the press reports are accurate or inaccurate about the contents of that complaint.

But what I do know is this, if in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Director of National Intelligence, an employee or contractor who follows the law and makes a complaint, and it is possible for the subject of that complaint to essentially quash the complaint or keep it from Congress, then this system is badly broken.

Schiff can’t be more right and this can’t get more basic. This is where the line is drawn. If we don’t get a handle on this right now, then history may identify this as the seminal moment when the United States shifted from a democracy to an autocracy.


Liked it? Take a second to support Ursula Faw and PolitiZoom on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

19 Comments on "Joe Biden Says ‘There’s No Bottom To Trump’s Willingness To Abase His Power’"

newest oldest most voted
p j evans

Schiff can ask a court for a writ of mandamus, since the law is clear on how the complaint should be handled, and this maladministration is breaking that law. After that – arrests are possible. And Pelosi has to decide whether she’s going to get off that pot.

dana fairfield

I heard someone on TV (forget who) make the point that what Pelosi wants is Trump in prison. He said that if a vote to impeach came up in the House today, it would pass, but Trump would still be in office. He believes that for Pelosi, impeachment is insufficient. Her end game is prison for Trump.

Denis Elliott
The problem with going to court is the law in question contains a provision stating that the decision of the IG and/or DNI regarding the merit of the complaint are NOT subject to judicial review. So, the law spells out that the IG has two weeks to investigate a complaint and make a recommendation on whether it is credible and/or urgent & therefore whether the DNI is required to forward it to Congress. Although the IG made that determination the DNI (or more precisely ACTING DNI) made his own decision that the complaint falls outside the scope of the statute.… Read more »
p j evans

The ICIG is supposed to tell the whistle-blower that they have the option of going to HPSCI directly. At this point, that’s their best option, since their career in government is effectively over.

I thought the rules protect the whistle blowers from injury of persecution if they tell the truth of the matter and that losing their job would be a pressure point of contention … IANAL myself and wonder just what those protections really are, because this person has shown loyalty to our Country, rather than numb nuts in the WH … so, in effect, he is more loyal to the Constitution, the rule of laws and our USA than anyone else in the GOP at this point …. his personal protection should be addressed by Mr. Schiff and his committee, send… Read more »