A (Bolt)on Out Of The Gray

There are a several plays on words and expressions in the title of today’s article. Don’t let that diminish the serious of its content. We are rapidly approaching a fateful point in the impeachment of Donald Trump and the history of America. Let’s explore.

I caught a small portion of the Trump defense team’s presentation on Saturday and it was mainly a bunch of lies and then arguments based on those lies. To add insult to injury, they weren’t even good or new lies. They were repetitions of debunked claims. They may have been uttered by other voices but the words were Trump’s. They weren’t really trying to convince the GOP Senators to close ranks; they were offering them lies they could pretend to believe while simultaneously flattering Trump.

It is probably fair to describe me as a big ego guy. I’m very proud of the articles I turn out on this site; I’d like to think with reason. Sometimes somebody does a better job of bringing a point across and Dana Milbank’s Saturday op-ed in the Washington Post, facetiously entitled, Trump’s lawyers are absolutely entitled to their own facts, is a case in point. In it Milbank juxtaposes facts and the Trump legal team’s alternate facts (a/k/a lies). (Too bad Kellyanne Conway doesn’t have a law license anymore; she could have been on the defense team.)

Sunday the New York Times (a/k/a The Gray Lady) published excerpts from former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton’s forthcoming book detailing firsthand knowledge of Trump’s involvement in Ukrainegate. This is just another, what should be, nail in Trump’s political coffin. I fear it will not be.

If nothing else it makes a clear case for why witnesses are necessary in the impeachment trial if it is going to have any credibility. Trump, of course, denied Bolton’s reported words. Am I the only one who sees a pattern here? Someone says something involving Trump that he doesn’t like or want to confront and he either denies it or lies about it. (I apologize. In Trump’s case that is mainly a difference without distinction.) The examples are numerous and I’ve written about them many times. I can make better use of your time than to repeat several of them as evidence.

The reaction from Republican senators/jurors has split mainly along three lines: silence (those are the smart/play it politically safe ones), attacking Bolton (an old attack the messenger when you can’t dispute the message strategy which Trump loves to employ) and well maybe we will consider witnesses.

Unless and until Republican public opinion sways against Trump the vast majority of Republican Senators will disregard both their oath of office to defend the Constitution and their oath as jurors remaining Trump sycophants. They will take their chances in the general election but are afraid of Trump in the primary.

While Senators like Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine have talked about possibly calling for witnesses, as of this writing none have come out and taken a firm stand on that issue.

Anyone seeking the truth on which to base a verdict/decision would clearly want to hear and see all available relevant information, including any coming out after the commencement of the trial. It makes you wonder about those who either don’t or are ambiguous about it. No it doesn’t!

This article is the property of tellthetruthonthem.com and its content may not be used without citing the source. It may not be reproduced without the permission of Larry Marciniak.



One thought on “A (Bolt)on Out Of The Gray”

Comments are closed.