How impeachment works: A Clinton impeachment veteran lays it out

Chairman Adam Schiff is the current personification of the adage that lying liars lie.  Unfortunately for him and his Democrat caucus, he isn't very good at it.  His lying to the American people lacks the great panache of a Bill Clinton, so he isn't even entertaining.  Instead, he has essentially channeled the second "two for the price of one" Clinton, Hillary Clinton to be exact, in lying, with the same boring, sanctimonious pomposity that makes Clinton so unappealing.

The other well known adage not yet faced by House Democrats is the fact that it is not against the law to lie to the press or fellow citizens, but it is most definitely against the law to lie to Department of Justice officials, including FBI special agents and all members of the House and Senate and their staff.

If the Democrat leadership pursues the impeachment of President Trump and votes out articles of impeachment, evidence will be presented in a trial in the U.S. Senate, presided over by Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts.  Impeachment "House managers," those elected congressional representatives chosen to present the impeachment case to the full Senate, will be in huge significant legal danger of being caught up in perjury.

I have some experience with this entire impeachment process, as the professional staff member of the House Committee on Rules, focused on the 1998 impeachment inquiry of President Clinton.  My investigative portfolio had three avenues of investigation, focused on the illegal money flow into the Clinton administration. 

I had the Russian/Ukraine mafiya attempt to bribe Bill.  In those days, the Russian and Ukrainian mafiya were closer, until, in an interview in a Paris hotel room with the late Mike Wallace and his 60 Minutes team, a key Russian (actually Latvian) mafiya leader said he had broken with his Ukrainian partner, "but we agreed not to kill one another."  All in the room believed him.

I also had the Chinese triad connection and found it amazing that a former Little Rock fry cook, who was also a triad member, could drop literally hundreds of thousands of dollars on a DNC fundraising official's desk.

But by far an order-of-magnitude greater threat to global criminality was what is known as the "princeling class" of People's Republic of China leadership.  Although the word "princeling" is masculine, many females in the PRC were also part of that privileged, greedy, power-hungry generational political cohort.

In the Animal Farm version of the People's Republic of China, some animals (the pigs) were more equal than others.  Consequently, it is no accident that the term "princeling" means greedy and metaphorically piglike in their bastardized communist world.  The PRC leadership structure is much more historically dynastic than is often recognized, and the world can hope that perhaps President Xi Jinping will actually be the last emperor of a totalitarian  police state as China hopefully fractures into a more fair and equal free democratic state of nation rule.  Today's versions of the princelings are the denizens of the PRC's "Deep State" made visible.

The children of veteran communists who held high-ranking offices in China before 1966, the first year of the Cultural Revolution, are commonly called "princelings." There are princelings by birth — sons and daughters of former high ranking officers and officials of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) — and princelings by marriage.

The fact that Hunter Biden and Paul Pelosi appear to be an example of American princelings not very different from the Chinese class of them, and Hunter apparently intersecting with them, is troubling and should be addressed because corrupt family power at the highest level of the American political class is not a good trend.

Unfortunately, in the Clinton impeachment case, the House Articles of Impeachment veered away from my national security issues and into a very simple and tight legally evidence-based sex perjury case.  As expected, it went nowhere in the Senate trial, and it has often been commented that President Clinton's poll numbers went up after the event ended.

Today, the House leadership is in lockstep, marching right into trying to make a "high crime" national security case against President Trump.  As the president has correctly pointed out, "fake news" has now become the corrupt normal mainstream media news.  Reporters have to know that Rep. Schiff is a lying when his lips move, and his fellow Democratic caucus members, circling the wagons around him to protect him, are not stupid — just agenda-driven to win at all cost.

So who will become the House impeachment "manager" teammates who are at great risk of perjury when they march across Capitol Hill to present their manufactured evidence in a Senate trial?  So far, it is obvious they are trying the case in the court of public opinion, without rules of evidence, to make what is obviously a "b‑‑‑‑‑‑‑" case against President Trump.

I now think it will never come to the House voting on articles of impeachment, but if the House does, they had better figure out how to effect a fast walk-back for all their current public statements being made in defense of a deeply flawed and bogus set of facts that will eventually being put into evidence upon pain of perjury. 

Image credit: Gage Skidmore via FlickrCC BY-SA 2.0.

Chairman Adam Schiff is the current personification of the adage that lying liars lie.  Unfortunately for him and his Democrat caucus, he isn't very good at it.  His lying to the American people lacks the great panache of a Bill Clinton, so he isn't even entertaining.  Instead, he has essentially channeled the second "two for the price of one" Clinton, Hillary Clinton to be exact, in lying, with the same boring, sanctimonious pomposity that makes Clinton so unappealing.

The other well known adage not yet faced by House Democrats is the fact that it is not against the law to lie to the press or fellow citizens, but it is most definitely against the law to lie to Department of Justice officials, including FBI special agents and all members of the House and Senate and their staff.

If the Democrat leadership pursues the impeachment of President Trump and votes out articles of impeachment, evidence will be presented in a trial in the U.S. Senate, presided over by Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts.  Impeachment "House managers," those elected congressional representatives chosen to present the impeachment case to the full Senate, will be in huge significant legal danger of being caught up in perjury.

I have some experience with this entire impeachment process, as the professional staff member of the House Committee on Rules, focused on the 1998 impeachment inquiry of President Clinton.  My investigative portfolio had three avenues of investigation, focused on the illegal money flow into the Clinton administration. 

I had the Russian/Ukraine mafiya attempt to bribe Bill.  In those days, the Russian and Ukrainian mafiya were closer, until, in an interview in a Paris hotel room with the late Mike Wallace and his 60 Minutes team, a key Russian (actually Latvian) mafiya leader said he had broken with his Ukrainian partner, "but we agreed not to kill one another."  All in the room believed him.

I also had the Chinese triad connection and found it amazing that a former Little Rock fry cook, who was also a triad member, could drop literally hundreds of thousands of dollars on a DNC fundraising official's desk.

But by far an order-of-magnitude greater threat to global criminality was what is known as the "princeling class" of People's Republic of China leadership.  Although the word "princeling" is masculine, many females in the PRC were also part of that privileged, greedy, power-hungry generational political cohort.

In the Animal Farm version of the People's Republic of China, some animals (the pigs) were more equal than others.  Consequently, it is no accident that the term "princeling" means greedy and metaphorically piglike in their bastardized communist world.  The PRC leadership structure is much more historically dynastic than is often recognized, and the world can hope that perhaps President Xi Jinping will actually be the last emperor of a totalitarian  police state as China hopefully fractures into a more fair and equal free democratic state of nation rule.  Today's versions of the princelings are the denizens of the PRC's "Deep State" made visible.

The children of veteran communists who held high-ranking offices in China before 1966, the first year of the Cultural Revolution, are commonly called "princelings." There are princelings by birth — sons and daughters of former high ranking officers and officials of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) — and princelings by marriage.

The fact that Hunter Biden and Paul Pelosi appear to be an example of American princelings not very different from the Chinese class of them, and Hunter apparently intersecting with them, is troubling and should be addressed because corrupt family power at the highest level of the American political class is not a good trend.

Unfortunately, in the Clinton impeachment case, the House Articles of Impeachment veered away from my national security issues and into a very simple and tight legally evidence-based sex perjury case.  As expected, it went nowhere in the Senate trial, and it has often been commented that President Clinton's poll numbers went up after the event ended.

Today, the House leadership is in lockstep, marching right into trying to make a "high crime" national security case against President Trump.  As the president has correctly pointed out, "fake news" has now become the corrupt normal mainstream media news.  Reporters have to know that Rep. Schiff is a lying when his lips move, and his fellow Democratic caucus members, circling the wagons around him to protect him, are not stupid — just agenda-driven to win at all cost.

So who will become the House impeachment "manager" teammates who are at great risk of perjury when they march across Capitol Hill to present their manufactured evidence in a Senate trial?  So far, it is obvious they are trying the case in the court of public opinion, without rules of evidence, to make what is obviously a "b‑‑‑‑‑‑‑" case against President Trump.

I now think it will never come to the House voting on articles of impeachment, but if the House does, they had better figure out how to effect a fast walk-back for all their current public statements being made in defense of a deeply flawed and bogus set of facts that will eventually being put into evidence upon pain of perjury. 

Image credit: Gage Skidmore via FlickrCC BY-SA 2.0.