Well, it’s begun. The Trump impeachment circus has engulfed the Hill. House Democrats are keeping a tight lid on the unofficial impeachment inquiry, selectively releasing documents that cater to their narrative and babysitting GOP members on the committees involved in this witch-hunt. They’re giving them one-page summaries of hearings and testimonies, shadowed by a Democratic staffer. It’s pure nonsense. It all stems from a whistleblower account from a reported CIA agent, who admits to being a registered Democrat, had worked in the Obama White House, and with a 2020 Democratic candidate.

Oh, and this person contacted the staff of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), chair of the House Intelligence Committee, who then knew about the contents of this report before it was officially filed. It’s all based on second-hand sources. This person never listened in on the call between Trump and the Ukrainian president in July, where a shakedown of sorts was allegedly carried out. Trump threatened to hold aid unless Ukraine looked into the dealings of the Biden family in their country. Hunter Biden was on the board of an energy company while Joe was serving as vice president despite having zero experience in this line of work. The Trump White House released the transcript, where this allegation was debunked.

If you thought facts wouldn’t deter Democrats from not pulling the trigger on their long-term project against this administration, you’d be correct. Yet, The Wall Street Journal editorial board took the Left to the woodshed for the whitewashing of their 2016 foreign interference antics, which has Hillary Clinton’s hands all over the evidence. First, they hired ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele to compile an opposition research file on Trump using Kremlin sources that were financed by the Clinton campaign and the Democrats. That Trump dossier was then used by the FBI, who appears to have never verified it given the errors in the file that could’ve been easily spotted with a simple Google search, to secure FISA spy warrants against Carter Page, a former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser. That sounds like Democrat-Russian collusion. Or what about the Clinton-Ukraine ties Katie wrote about, citing an investigative piece from Politico:

Shortly before President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration in January, POLITICO published a lengthy investigative piece about the Clinton campaign and Democrat National Committee's brazen collusion with the Ukrainian government to win the White House and to damage Trump's candidacy. […] Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation. Politico’s investigation found evidence of Ukrainian government involvement in the race that appears to strain diplomatic protocol dictating that governments refrain from engaging in one another’s elections.

The “favor” that Trump asked of the Ukrainians related to the ongoing Department of Justice probe into the origins of the Russia collusion fiasco—which has now become a criminal investigation. That’s a U.S.-based investigation and something that is not out of the question. We need to know how this whole Trump-Russia collusion freak show came about (via WSJ):

Democrats want to impeach Donald Trump for inviting Ukraine to investigate 2020 election rival Joe Biden. But then why are they opposed to investigating whether Democrats used Russian disinformation to get the FBI to investigate Donald Trump in 2016? That’s the double standard now on gaudy public display over multiple news reports that U.S. Attorney John Durham’s review of the origins of the Russian fiasco of 2016 has become a criminal probe. Attorney General William Barr this year appointed Mr. Durham, a highly regarded and veteran prosecutor, to examine this part of the Russia tale that special counsel Robert Mueller chose to ignore. […] Democrats know that the Hillary Clinton campaign paid Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Mr. Trump, and Fusion hired former British spook Christopher Steele, who compiled a dossier of allegations about Mr. Trump from Russian sources that turned out to be false. Worse, Fusion funneled the dossier to the FBI, which used it to persuade the secret FISA court to issue a warrant to eavesdrop on Trump official Carter Page. Democrats now want to discredit any attempt to hold people accountable if crimes were committed as part of this extraordinary dirty trick. […] What Americans deserve to know is what happened, including who in the Obama Administration or FBI worked with Fusion GPS, whether the White House or CIA were involved, and what James Comey’s FBI told the FISA court. People need to be held publicly accountable so reforms can be made and to serve as a deterrent so this doesn’t happen again.

Well said, though I think the publication gave too much credit to the narrative that Trump failed at a quid pro quo push. Reportedly, the Ukrainians didn’t even know at the time of the July call U.S. aid was under review, so no quid. Also, it’s not like we don’t conduct reviews for aid packages. Again, this Trump-Ukraine obsession is probably shoddier than the Kremlin collusion hysterics, but the Left has to find something to launch an impeachment offensive. They promised their base blood. This is it before the 2020 election kicks into high gear.