Jaime Hererra Beutler released a statement on December 13th explaining why she will vote no on impeachment. She certainly lays out the Republican talking points but demonstrates no critical thinking skills. Her argument is disingenuous, to say the least.
She states there was no first-hand information about the President’s motives. Does she really believe the only way to discover a person’s motives is by asking him directly? Using this logic, it’s a wonder anyone is ever convicted of a crime. Obviously, one can determine a person’s motives, to a great degree, by their actions. Several people with first-hand information gave sworn testimony as to Trump’s actions. We also know Trump’s attorneys had the “perfect phone call” with Zelensky (President of Ukraine) moved to a secret server and a verbatim transcript has never been released. Only a summary of the call was released by the White House.
As to others with first-hand information about Trump’s actions, none of them would testify (and he blocked many from testifying). Why would no one come forth and defend Trump on the facts? Trump has said on more than one occasion that he is the most transparent president in history. So, why wouldn’t Trump, Giuliani, and others with first-hand knowledge testify to Congress and the American people and explain all the good work they were allegedly doing to root out corruption in Ukraine?
Beutler states Trump told Ambassador Sondland, “there is no quid pro quo – I want nothing.” At this point, Trump already knew of the whistleblower complaint and had spoken with his attorneys, who obviously told him he had done something wrong and told him what to say to Sondland. Trump does not use Latin phrases; he was told to say that. Additionally, his saying “I want nothing” directly contradicts what he admits saying to Zelensky on the phone — that he wanted a favor.
Herrera Beutler thinks it is important that Trump said there was no quid pro quo, but hasn’t she read our federal election law (52 USC 30121)? The law doesn’t require a quid pro quo; just the act of asking (soliciting) a foreign national to get involved with regard to our elections is illegal. Trump clearly did that.
Beutler also states that Zelensky said he did not feel pressured. What would you expect him to say when he was asked this on TV while sitting next to Trump? He wants to stay on Trump’s good side because he wants and needs help in the form of money and arms from the US to fight an ongoing war with Russia. Plus, there was sworn testimony in the impeachment hearings that Zelensky had, in fact, stated he was feeling pressured by Trump well before the July telephone call.
Herrera Beutler has chosen to ignore Trump’s own words and actions, all the sworn testimony during the hearings, and the plain language of our federal election law. A pathetic, partisan performance by our Representative.
Frank Hackett
Onalaska
