‘Hey, Nancy! Let’s Put on a Show!’

By Al Perrotta Published on October 10, 2019

“There’s no business like impeachment business. Like no business I know … ”

Hey, guys and dolls! Add Uncle Joe Biden to the cast calling for Trump’s impeachment because he …. umm …. well. Um. Oh, he just has to be impeached. It’s in the script. A script in development since hours after the 2016 election. Like the rest of the Democratic cavalcade of stars, bit players and news media chorus singing along in unison, Biden is leaving backstage what used to call “due process.”

Due process? An actual high crime or misdemeanor? A bonafide impeachment vote? That’s for amateurs. Community theater. Two-bit flyover country. This is the Great Swamp Way, Baby!!

Let the curtain rise and let’s give ’em the ol’ Razzle-Dazzle. And hope the American public “never grows wise.”

The plot twists of this song-and-dance pile on by the hour.

The Whistleblower Worked for a 2020 Candidate

Remember the so-called whistleblower? Or as we may dub his character, Harry Hearsay? Turns out Harry had a “professional relationship” with a current 2020 candidate. That’s what the Intelligence Committee Inspector General Michael Atkinson told Congress last week he meant, when he told the DOJ that the whistleblower had “some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate.”

Think about that. Would anyone not a few notes short of a chord be talking impeachment had Michael Atkinson simply said that? Had he simply stated “the whistleblower once worked for a current political opponent of the President.” “Indicia”? Sounds like something you take penicillin for.

Rule #7 in the Great Swamp Way: If somebody uses fancy language when simple English will do, they are hiding something.

So who was the candidate and what was this guy’s role? Cory Booker’s barber? Beto’s skateboard waxer? Kamala’s dealer? Maybe Hillary’s yoga instructor? Atkinson wouldn’t reveal either the candidate or nature of the “professional relationship.” Guess we’ll have to wait until the second act. 

According to The New York Times, Atkinson found a third fact that could be used to accuse the whistleblower of potential bias. What that bias is remains redacted.

Harry Hearsay’s Three Strikes

Atkinson says Harry Hearsay’s three strikes, including working for someone gunning for Trump’s job, “did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern ‘appears credible.” That assessment seems more Inspector Clouseau than Inspector General.

Meanwhile, look as hard as you can, but you still aren’t going to find an “urgent concern.” What you will find:

  1. A CIA officer who worked in Obama White House. Translation: One of John Brennan’s people.
  2. A Democrat who had a professional relationship with a Trump opponent.
  3. A third unknown cause for concern about his (or her) political motivation.
  4. Someone who, of all the lawyers in DC he could choose, picks a Democratic activist. An activist who worked for Schumer and Clinton.
  5. Someone who didn’t like the way the official process was going. So broke the rules and ran like a kid crying to Mama Schiff.
  6. That’s Adam Schiff, who won’t even tell our elected Republican representatives who the whistleblower is. Who flat out faked what the president said in his phone call. Who with Pelosi changed the House procedures on impeachment the very day of the “whistleblower’s” August 12 letter.
  7. Just like how Atkinson conveniently changed the IC rules about hearsay just as this “complaint” came along.
  8. All to put on a rule-changing, constitution-breaking, tradition-ignoring, due-process trashing “Impeachment” production.

Staged? Les Miz isn’t staged this well. (But like that show, they are singing the song of angry men and women. Angry at losing in 2016.)

The Whistleblower’s Two-Page Memo

Before skipping procedure and heading over to Adam Schiff, Hearsay Harry wrote a two-page memo. This was the day after President Trump spoke to Ukraine’s new president. A little congratulatory call. Harry wrote that a White House official on the call thought it was “crazy” and “frightening.” The call left him shaken. Have you read the transcript? Clearly this official, if he even exists, would wet themselves on a kiddie ride at Disneyland.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

How screwball is this impeachment farce? CBS News is reporting on what’s in the two-page memo … “as described to CBS News.” Yes. A description of a memo about a phone call that’s a dramatic interpretation someone who wasn’t on the phone call says someone else says they heard on the phone call. Boy, if only CBS News could get a transcript of the actual call. Instead, they’ll make like Liza, grab a fedora and cane, and shake the rafters. Swamp Life is a cabaret, old chum.

The Stream has been leaked a tape from inside the Intelligence Community and network news organizations. (See if you can spot the Defense Intelligence Agency counter-terrorist export just arrested for feeding classified information to his NBC News honey-bunny.)

Yes, They Should Be Frightened

Actually, there are people who would find Trump’s call with the Ukraine frightening. Specifically those who don’t want us to know exactly who in the Obama White House was involved in Ukraine’s acknowledged 2016 interference.

We know the Hillary-controlled DNC was involved:

And who, for example, pressured Ukraine to stop an investigation into a Soros-funded operation.

And then there’s Uncle Joe. His role in the Ukraine show is even bigger than previously billed.

Just yesterday, a Ukrainian parliament member held a press conference claiming that Joe Biden himself was paid $900,000 by Burisma to lobby the Ukraine government. Citing investigation materials, Andriy Derkach laid out the details, saying:

Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group.

Derkach also said “no less than $16.5 million” went to Hunter Biden and friends at Burisma. (You could almost afford Broadway tickets, parking and dinner for that kind of scratch.)

Long before Trump’s phone call with the Ukraine president, Ukraine reopened its investigation into Burisma. And we know Attorney General William Barr is digging into the Ukraine business. Including their coordination with the DNC and Obama administration to impact the 2016 election.

Meanwhile …

Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation has spread beyond the origins of the Trump-Russia black op to the curious appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

All told, Democrats should spend less time singing about Impeachment, and more time worrying about who’s singing to Barr and Durham. And who’s going to end up singing the Cell Block Tango.

 

Al Perrotta is the Managing Editor of The Stream and co-author, with @JZmirak, of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration. You can follow him at @StreamingAl. And if you aren’t already, please follow The Stream at @Streamdotorg.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
Inspiration
A Christian ‘Opposite’ Strategy for Making a Difference
Tom Gilson
More from The Stream
Connect with Us