HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES LAUNCHES A FORMAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY OF DONALD TRUMP BECAUSE HE'S A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO AMERICA'S NATIONAL SECURITY AND A THREAT TO OUR DEMOCRACY. THE REASONS ARE IN BLACK AND WHITE.

After reading this editorial, please express your own thoughts.  At the bottom, please click on the word "Comments" below the copyright and type your remarks in the box.  When finished,  please click on the word "Publish."  Please also share a link to this column with others in your e-mail directory and on social media.

This copyrighted column - in part or in its entirety - may be freely shared among individuals, and it may be reprinted, republished, or quoted in any medium, including broadcast, cable, satellite, print, Internet, and other forms of media, but only when crediting Gary B. Duglin and The Controversy.  
      

     It's long overdue for the reckless Donald Trump to make like Snagglepuss and exit stage right.  Oh I'm sure there are Republicans nationwide who will always remain hellbent not to abandon their support for Trump, but like Hanna-Barbera's mountain lion cartoon character, I think the time is nearing for when Trump's cheerleaders will collectively cry out "Heavens to Murgatroyd."  That's because the Trump base will be surprised - nay shocked - when Republicans in Congress step up to the plate and agree with Democrats that country is more important than party and that Trump needs to go away.

     Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi did what she has held off from doing for months when on Tuesday, September 24th, 2019 the California Democrat - in an address to the nation - announced a formal impeachment inquiry of Donald Trump.  And on Wednesday morning, September 25th, the latest reasons for Trump to be prosecuted went from being tremendously strong circumstantial evidence to powerfully proven facts in a black and white document.  That's because a summary - not a word-for-word verbatim transcript - of a July 25th, 2019 telephone conversation
  
between Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine was made public by the Trump administration which blatantly provides the evidence that Trump tried to intimidate a foreign government with U.S. armed forces aid, in exchange for dirt on a political opponent who is running for the 2020 Democratic nomination; that candidate being former Vice President Joe Biden. And since military assistance is considered "a thing of value," such an offer...such a promise... such a threat to another nation...is a violation of America's

federal campaign law.  As has been reported for nearly a week by major news outlets throughout our country, Trump bullied President Zelensky by pressuring the new Ukrainian leader to investigate the business dealings of Vice President Biden's son Hunter Biden, referring to unfounded claims that the younger Biden was involved in a corruption scheme in Ukraine, and that the former Vice President's diplomatic efforts were affected while he was in office under President Barack Obama.  Trump's accusations against the Bidens refer to an erroneous Internet posting which claims that Vice President Biden threatened to slash one-billion dollars in aid to Ukraine if the government did not terminate its ace prosecutor who was allegedly investigating a Ukrainian natural gas company where Mr. Biden's son was an executive.  The truth of the matter is that the gas company was not part of any active probe during the time when it is alleged that Vice President Biden was calling for the firing of the Ukrainian prosecutor.  Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma Holdings in Ukraine and the Bidens were cleared of any impropriety by multiple sources as there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing by either Joe Biden or his son. Further proof came earlier this year when Politifact reported that it found nothing unlawful or even inappropriate to "support the idea that Joe Biden advocated with his son's interests in mind."

     Speaker Pelosi told Americans that by "calling upon a foreign power to intervene in his election, this is a breach of his constitutional responsibilities."  Mrs. Pelosi did not mince words on Tuesday, September 24th that "The actions taken to date by (Donald Trump) have seriously violated the Constitution," and that "The actions of the Trump presidency revealed the dishonorable fact of (Trump's) betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.  Therefore, today I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry."  Speaker Pelosi advised the nation that House Democrats' six committees will "proceed with their investigation under that umbrella."  More than 175 Democrats support some form of impeachment action. That's about three-quarters of the 235 Members in the Democratic caucus.

     This entire ordeal erupted after The Washington Post published a report on Wednesday, September 18th about a whistleblower complaint that was filed in August 2019 by a U.S. intelligence officer who reported troubling and alarming concerns about communications between Donald Trump and a foreign leader.  But Trump, on Friday, September 20th, without knowing the identity of the whistleblower, labeled the complaint "partisan" and a "political hack job."  From The Oval Office, Trump was on the defensive.  "It's ridiculous.  It's a partisan whistleblower.  They shouldn't even have information."  Meanwhile, Congressman Adam Schiff of California (Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee) tweeted on Tuesday, September 24th that the whistleblower wants to testify before Congress. "We have been informed by the whistleblower's counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI (Director of National Intelligence) as to how to do so.  We'e in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower's testimony as soon as this week."   

     According to Politifact, "The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act protects intelligence officials from retribution for flagging what they believe to be government misconduct. The law was passed in 1998 and refined in 2010 with the establishment of the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General."  Once a whistleblower complaint is presented to the inspector general, the IG, Michael Atkinson, is then required to give the complaint to the Director of National Intelligence, who is then, by law, required to give the complaint to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees so that Congress can carry out the appropriate oversight of the President and others in the executive branch.  Atkinson - who was appointed by Donald Trump - reportedly considered the complaint to be worthy of investigation and that it needed immediate attention by Congress.  Speaker Pelosi, in her Tuesday, September 24th speech, noted that one week before, on Tuesday, September 17th, Atkinson notified Congress that the Trump administration was "forbidding him from turning over" the complaint to the legislative branch, despite the fact that the intelligence watchdog tagged the complaint as "serious" and "urgent."  Mrs. Pelosi made no bones about it.  "This is a 

violation of law." But Trump and the acting DNI, Joseph Maguire didn't care and prevented the complaint from going to Congress until late afternoon on Wednesday, September 25th.  Maguire - presumably under orders by Trump - had blocked Congress from receiving the complaint; presumably to withhold it from Democrats.  On Thursday, September 19th, Congressman Schiff told anchor Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show, "This involves an allegation of serious wrongdoing, something that the inspector general felt needed to be presented to Congress.  It is unprecedented for a director to withhold that information from Congress."  And Speaker Pelosi was very clear that Acting DNI Maguire's behavior was also "a violation of law."  Congressman Schiff issued a subpoena for the whistleblower's complaint earlier in September. Maguire is scheduled to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday, September 26th.

     In a non-binding resolution that was brought to the floor on Tuesday, September 24th by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, the full body of senators voted unanimously for the whistleblower complaint to be released to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees. None of the 100 U.S. senators - 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats - objected to the resolution.  And on Wednesday, September 25th, Senator Schumer noted that all the senators from both parties agreed that blocking the complaint "was wrong."  Meanwhile, late the same day, the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were given the complaint. Congressman Schiff says the whistleblower paints a "disturbing" portait of the allegations against Donald Trump, but Schiff also says that the complaint is "very credible."  Earlier on September 25th, after reading the summary notes of the Trump/Zelensky phone conversation, Schiff condemned Trump's language.  "What those notes reflect is a classic Mafia-like shakedown of a foreign leader." 
  
     All of the above being said, Donald Trump is apparently scared to death that Vice President Biden would beat him in the upcoming election, thus Trump has allegedly committed additional crimes of international conspiracy, bribery, and extortion, along with a laundry list of other illegal activities he's alleged to have participated in over the last four years since becoming a presidential candidate and his subsequent move into The White House.

     What was expected to be a transcript of the Trump/Zelensky telephone conversation is actually - according to The White House - "notes and recollections of Situation Room officers and National Security Council policy staff" who listen to official conversations.  Therefore, the 5-page document is only a representation of what was discussed.  Trump on Tuesday, September 24th tweeted that he had authorized the release of the "complete, fully declassified and unredacted" transcript of his July telephone call with Zelensky.  The release of the dialogue provided during that 30-minute conversation visibly indicates that Donald Trump solicited dirt on a political opponent, plain and simple.  And it was this phone call that triggered the whistleblower's complaint.  Trump - as the occupant of The Oval Office - used the leader of a foreign power to enter in to a conspiracy in order for Trump to advance his own interests for political re-election.

     Trump's manipulative tactics set up Ukrainian President Zelensky to obviously feel the pressure, and the full weight of that pressure, as Trump moved forward in a manner that is so clear to me to be a quid pro quo; you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. 

     Below are just a few highlighted segments from the aforementioned summary.

     Trump:  "I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine.  We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time.  Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are."  Trump continued, "The United States has been very very good to Ukraine.  I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine."

     One does not have to read between the lines to get the gist of what Trump is telling Zelensky.  It's plain as day.  But there's more.

     Zelensky:  "Yes you are absolutely right.  I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense.  We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes."

     Trump:  "I would like you do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.  I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike...  I guess you have one of your wealthy people...  The server, they say Ukraine has it.  There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation.  I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people.  I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it.  As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible."

     Note:  Crowdstrike is an American cybersecurity technology firm based in Sunnyvale, California.  The company investigated the hacking of the Democratic National Committee's computer servers in connection with the interference of America's 2016 presidential election.

     Zelensky:  "Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier.  For me as a President, it is very important and we are open for any future cooperation.  We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine."  Zelensky continued, "I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine.  I just wanted to assure you once again that you have nobody but friends around us.  I will make sure that I surround myself with the best and most experienced people.  I also wanted to tell you that we are friends. We are great friends and you Mr. President have friends in our country so we can continue our strategic partnership."

     Trump:  "Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man.  He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you.  I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General.  Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy.  If you could speak to him that would be great."  Trump continued, "There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.  Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look in to it...  It sounds horrible to me."

     Zelensky:  "Since we have won the absolute majority in our parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September.  He or she will look in to the situation."

     Trump repeated himself from earlier.

     Trump:  "I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it."

     Zelensky buttered up Trump.

     Zelensky:  "Last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower."  Zelensky continued, "I also want to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation."

     Trump once again repeated himself.

     Trump:  "I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call."

     This matter cannot in any way be minimized.  Donald Trump's disgraceful behavior should not and cannot be tolerated by the combined two Houses of Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike.  Trump, in an open setting, with witnesses, and with a written acknowledgment, has pursued political goals by giving a foreign leader a reason for him to illegally help Trump in an exchange for the United States helping Ukraine, and with additional assistance by the U.S. attorney general and by Trump's personal lawyer.  All in all, Donald Trump has put himself over our country, over his oath of office, and over the Constitution of the United States. But, as usual, Trump has called the Democrats' actions "a hoax, all a big hoax" and "a witch hunt."

     What more will it take for the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives to impeach Trump and for the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate to convict him for such felonies?  Does Trump actually have to "stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody" before he is evicted from The Oval Office?  What more do Members of the full Congress need, in order for them to do their jobs and to bounce Trump out of The West Wing?  

     Trump abused his power when he withheld $250 million in military aid to Ukraine. That funding was part of a bill that was passed by Congress earlier in the summer of 2019.  But as Trump told reporters on Monday, September 23rd, he practically confessed to overstepping his legal authority. "We want to make sure that country is honest.  It's very important to talk about corruption. If you don't talk about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?" As we have now seen in The White House summary, Trump invoked the names of Joe Biden and "Biden's son" (Hunter Biden) during his July call to President Zelensky. 

That telephone call was placed the day after former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified before Congress on July 24th, 2019 so Trump undoubtedly figured that he got away with conspiracy once, he might as well try a second time.

     The Washington Post - late Monday night, September 23rd - reported that Donald Trump

issued an explicit order to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to stop payment on the check, so to speak, for military aid to Ukraine and that the directive came at least one week before Trump's telephone call to President Zelensky when, as it seems out in the open now, Trump prodded the Ukrainian leader to probe in to the business affairs of Vice President Biden's son.  The Washington Post says that three senior administration officials informed the newspaper that Trump's order was relayed to both the Departments of State and Defense, noting that Trump had "concerns" about shelling out the big bucks to Ukraine.  But administration officials were instructed to tell lawmakers that the delay in releasing the money was simply part of the "interagency process."  The funds weren't released until Wednesday, September 11th, with an additional $140 million being added to the pot, for a total of $390 million in aid.  And that raises another question.  Where did the other $140 million come from?  The measure that was passed by Congress only included $250 million.  One has to wonder if Ukraine got the extra dough because of 

a conspiracy deal - (dare I say "collusion") - between Trump and Zelensky.  After all, we don't know if there were other conversations and additional communications between Trump and Zelensky.  Secretary of the Treasury Steve 
Mnuchin was caught off guard when he nervously responded to questions from Meet The Press moderator and NBC News political director Chuck Todd on the network's Sunday, September 22nd broadcast.  Chuck Todd:  "Can you explain how all of a sudden when the aid got released, more money showed up?  Where did that money come from?"  Steve Mnuchin:  "It was appropriated money that came through the State Department." Really?  Hmm.    

     On Tuesday, September 24th, Trump did acknowledge that he froze the treasure chest of loot, supposedly before his conversation with Zelensky, but that the funds have been "fully paid."  However, Trump came up with a different excuse for not paying earlier.  "I want other countries to put up money.  I'd withhold again, and I'll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute to Ukraine, because they're not doing it."  That's quite a flip-flop from Trump's previous reason that he withheld the money when he focused on corruption in Ukraine.

     Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate need to do their constitutional duty and remove Donald Trump from office.  The Wall Street Journal was correct when it published an article on Friday, September 20th whereby their reporting showed that Trump pressured Zelensky to work with Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani in an unmistakable attempt to dig up anything bad at all that could damage the reputation and devastate the campaign of Joe Biden.  For months, Trump and Giuliani have reportedly tried to push Ukraine in to investigating the Bidens in case the 76-year old Delaware Democrat becomes Trump's challenger in the 2020 race for The White House. 

    

     In a live interview with CNN anchor Chris Cuomo on Thursday, September 19th, Rudy Giuliani - in what I would describe as a complete meltdown - acted like a crazy-man throughout the approximately 30-minute appearance.  During his combative diatribe, Giuliani denied discussing Vice President Biden with Ukrainian officials.  However, seconds later, Giuliani implied that he did talk about Mr. Biden, so Chris Cuomo pinned down Giuliani by repeating his question.  "So you did ask Ukraine to look in to Joe Biden?"  Giuliani's response:  "Of course I did."
   

     Vice President Biden told reporters on Saturday, September 21st that it's Trump who "deserves to be investigated."  Mr. Biden was impressive and commanding with his assertion that "Trump's doing this because he knows I'll beat him like a drum. And he's using the abusive power and every element of the presidency to try to do something to smear me."  Vice President Biden was adamant that "This appears to be an overwhelming abuse of power, to get on the phone with a foreign leader, who is looking for help from the United States, and ask about me, and imply things, if that's what happened, that appears to be what happened, we know that's what Giuliani did. This is outrageous."

     But talking with reporters on the South Lawn of The White House on Sunday, September 22nd, Trump admitted to making the telephone call, but he insisted he did nothing wrong and that his conversation with Ukrainian President Zelensky was totally proper, even though Trump conceded to speaking about Joe Biden with Zelensky.  "No quid pro quo, there was nothing.  It was a perfect conversation."  We now know that's not true, and we can add more lies to Trump's list of more than 12,000, as calculated by The Washington Post.  

     On Monday, September 23rd, Trump went off the deep end.  In what has become his familiar out-of-control fashion, Trump attacked Vice President Biden with verbal viciousness and vindictiveness.  "Joe Biden and his son are corrupt."  America's "liar-in-chief" then - with his his hateful rhetoric - became even more villianous and wicked.  "If a Republican ever did what Joe Biden did, if a Republican ever said what Joe Biden said, they'd be getting the electric chair right now."  However, in plain sight with journalists as witnesses, Trump admitted to criminal activity.  "The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, with largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place, and largely the fact that we don't want our people like Vice President Biden and his son creating the corruption already in the Ukraine, and Ukraine has got a lot of problems."  We also now know that Trump was quite cunning and conniving when he talked with Zelensky.

     Democrats - and presumably most Americans - wanted not only for the administration to present a transcript of Trump's conversation with President Zelensky, but we should also be given the opportunity to review all documents related to Trump's contacts with the Ukrainian leader, and more importantly, the entire nation needs to see the whistleblower's complaint, as filed with the inspector general.  But that's not enough.  Is there an audio recording of the conversation? Could that be the "smoking gun" that most of America has been waiting for, as it was in 1974 with Richard Nixon?    

     Prior to Congress being given any of the documents, a letter was sent on Monday, September 23rd from Congressman Elijah Cummings of Maryland (Chairman of the House Oversight Committee), Congressman Eliot Engel of New York 

(Chairman of 
the House Foreign Affairs Committee), and Congressman Schiff, to Secretary of State Mike 

Pompeo.  The three Democratic legislators stated that "By withholding these documents and refusing to engage with the committees, the Trump Administration is obstructing Congress' oversight duty under the Constitution to protect our nation's democratic process."  Meanwhile, on Monday afternoon, September 23rd, Trump tweeted that the "Democrat/Crooked Media" is reporting more "Fake News" by claiming that "I pressured the Ukrainian President at least 8 times during my telephone call with him."  Vice President Biden replied in a tweet, "So release the transcript of the call then."  Now that a summary has been released, the number of times that Trump did put pressure on Zelensky may be in question, but whether it was eight or less is, quite frankly, irrelevant.  Trump did "pressure" the Ukrainian leader.

     The handwriting is on the wall that Donald Trump has violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977.  According to Wikipedia, "The FCPA applies to any person who has a certain degree of connection to the United States and engages in corrupt practices abroad, as to U.S. businesses, foreign corporations, trading securities in the U.S., American nationals, citizens, and residents acting in furtherance of a foreign corrupt practice, whether or not they are physically present in the U.S.  Any individuals involved in these activities may face prison time.  The FCPA governs not only direct payments to foreign officials, candidates, and parties, but payments made to any other recipient in furtherance of influencing a foreign official, candidate, or party.  These payments are not restricted to monetary forms and may include anything of value."  Plus, there are similarities to America's campaign finance law, which Trump has allegedly violated also.  Add everything up - combined with bribery, extortion and conspiracy - and you've got obstruction of justice too.  


     Trump thinks - as he has basically told Americans all along, and was definitive during remarks made in July 2019 - that, "as President," Article II of the United States Constitution "allows me to do whatever I want," which, of course, is false. Apparently, Trump does not remember what happened to our 37th President, Richard Nixon. 

     Along with reporters from The Washington Post, journalists with The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and various other first-rate news 

organizations, have continued their investigating with masterful skill, as Bob Woodward (on the right in the photo) and Carl Bernstein (on the left in the photo) of The Washington Post did during the Nixon era. Trump's abuse of the presidency is as bad, if not worse, than President Nixon's with Watergate. The bottom line is that Trump has pushed - some might say coerced - another foreign government - not Russia this time, but the Ukraine - to interfere in America's democracy by meddling in the upcoming presidential election.  Whether he thinks so or not, this is an obvious attempt at a quid pro quo arrangement by Trump.  So now that Congress has access to the whistleblower complaint, hopefully the American public will see it soon, as everyone deserves to know exactly what Trump said to the president of Ukraine, and not only what The White House wants us to read in a summary of that telephone conversation.

     America's democracy is at stake here.  Even if we were not told that The White House document was a summary of notes, put together by other administration personnel to represent the conversation between Trump and Zelensky as they were listening in on the call, I would have suspected that it was not an actual transcript. Nobody talks like that, especially not two world leaders.  The words on the page when read aloud sound like a poorly written script for a badly directed television 

show. Shades of President Nixon - I smell a cover-up.  Let's remember what Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen told Congress; that Donald Trump "sometimes communicates his wishes indirectly."  Cohen testified on February 27th, 2019 that Trump "speaks in a code," and that "most people" who know him understand the code.  During their conversation, as is documented in The White House summary, and referenced earlier in this column, President Zelensky mentioned that "one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently."  Suppose the former New York City mayor gave Zelensky's assistant a crash course, so to speak, on how Trump might convey himself in "code," and that the assistant briefed the Ukrainian president on such code including flowery phony phrases, telling Zelensky how much Trump has done for his country, asking for favors, and finally repeating himself over and over as to what Trump planned to do and what he wanted Zelensky to do.  In other words, Zalensky understood fully that Trump wanted him to get poisonous information that could destroy Vice President Joe Biden's chances at winning the Democratic nomination, let alone the presidency. Read the summary again and I believe you'll see my point.

     Despite what he may think, Donald Trump is not above the law.  But regular readers of The Controversy may recall that I have not been in favor of impeachment alone because that will not bring us to where the majority of Americans want us to be.  And that's to be free of Donald Trump.  But I understand it's important to launch an official impeachment "inquiry" as that opens doors to the Democrats in Congress by giving them access to materials they otherwise might not be provided, including

sensitive grand jury materials. However, unless Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, and at least 66 of the 99 other U.S. senators are unequivocally convinced that the evidence warrants conviction by the Senate, and therefore, advises Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats that Trump will positively be removed from office, then an actual vote for impeachment on the House floor may not be the wisest decision to make by the Democrats. 

     The whistleblower is a courageous individual and he or she needs to be applauded by each and every American and protected by the laws of our land.  But what he or she knows, firsthand, is vital to the national security and the democracy of our country because it involves crimes that the President of the United States allegedly committed and, therefore, he, Donald Trump, needs to be held accountable in a legal and constitutional manner. There's going to be a time - and probably sooner versus later - when more people in Trump's orbit realize that they need to jump ship or else they might go down with him and drown.  It's better to escape into cool or warm water and swim forward, than to be in lots of trouble in hot water and sink to the bottom.
    

     Donald Trump is a clear and present danger to America's national security and he's a threat to our democracy.  Republicans in the Senate must put country above party (I think all Democrats are on board already) and, therefore, those GOP lawmakers must immediately join with Democrats in the House of Representatives so that Donald Trump is impeached, convicted and removed from office, or - as what happened in 1974 with President Nixon - Republicans on Capitol Hill must force Trump to resign. For the sake of the United States of America, Congress can wait no longer.  But my one word of advice to Speaker Pelosi is "caution."  Do not give a green light for an impeachment vote unless the road traveled brings us to a destination that puts a complete stop to the Donald Trump presidency.

     And that's The Controversy for today.

     I'm Gary B. Duglin.

     "We'll talk again."

The Controversy is a publication of GBD Productions.  Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy is Gary B. Duglin.

Please express your personal opinions by following the instructions printed at the top of this column.  And thank you for reading The Controversy.

Photo credits:

1 - Michael Reynolds/EPA (Donald Trump)
2 - Hanna-Barbera Productions/Warner Bros. Animation (Snagglepuss cartoon character)
3 - ABC News Screenshot (Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi)
4 - Sean Gallup/Getty Images (President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine)
5 - Nick Wass/The Associated Press (Former President Barack Obama, Former Vice President Joe Biden and Hunter Biden)
6 - Office of the Director of National Intelligence (Inspector General of the Intelligence Community Michael Atkinson)
7 - The Associated Press (Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire)
8 - MSNBC Screenshot (Congressman Adam Schiff and MSNBC Anchor Rachel Maddow)
9 - Senate TV (Senator Chuck Schumer)
10 - Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg/Getty Images (Attorney General William Barr)
11 - Andrew Harnik/The Associated Press (Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller)
12 - Alex Brandon/The Associated Press (Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney)
13 - William B. Plowman/NBC/NBC NewsWire/Getty Images (Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mcnuchin and NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd)
14 - CNN Screenshot (Donald Trump's Personal Lawyer Rudy Giuliani and CNN Anchor Chris Cuomo)
15 - CNN Screenshot (Former Vice President Joe Biden)
16 - Susan Walsh/The Associated Press (Congressman Elijah Cummings)
17 - NY1 Screenshot (Congressman Eliot Engel)
18 - Alex Wong/Getty Images (Secretary of State Mike Pompeo)
19 - The New York Times (The New York Times Front Page "Nixon Resigns")
20 - The Associated Press (Former President Richard Nixon)
21 - The Washington Post (Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein)
22 - Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (Donald Trump's Former Personal Lawyer Michael Cohen)
23 - Leah Millis/Reuters (Senator Mitch McConnell)
24 - The Guardian (Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Donald Trump)

Copyright 2019 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net.  All Rights Reserved.

NO WARREN. NO SANDERS. A FAR-LEFT PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL CANNOT WIN THE PRESIDENCY IN 2020 SO DEMOCRATS NEED TO BE CAREFUL. BACK BIDEN TO WIN THE WHITE HOUSE.

After reading this editorial, please express your own thoughts.  At the bottom, please click on the word "Comments" below the copyright and type your remarks in the box.  When finished,  please click on the word "Publish."  Please also share a link to this column with others in your e-mail directory and on social media.

This copyrighted column - in part or in its entirety - may be freely shared among individuals, and it may be reprinted, republished, or quoted in any medium, including broadcast, cable, satellite, print, Internet, and other forms of media, but only when crediting Gary B. Duglin and The Controversy.
        

     Except for the first and second paragraphs of this commentary, I wrote the bulk of this editorial as part of my April 28th, 2019 column.  But my words are worth repeating today because certain polls are showing that there is increased enthusiasm for candidate Elizabeth Warren for the Democratic nomination for President. Progressives throughout America don't seem to understand that the senior U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, if she wins the Democratic nomination, cannot be successful in the general election.  A far-left progressive liberal cannot win the presidency --- at least not in 2020.  Therefore, whether it's Senator Warren, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, or any other person who defines himself or herself as a progressive Democrat cannot beat Donald Trump or any other Republican who may be on the ballot next year.  So if you're a Democrat - whether progressive, liberal, moderate, or conservative, (and yes, there are conservative Democrats), be careful and be smart. As for Independents who lean to the left, you too need to be on your toes so to not make a mistake that could put Trump in The White House for another term. 

Americans need to support a Democratic candidate who can actually defeat the GOP nominee for President, as well as having long enough coattails so that Democrats gain control of the Senate and retain the majority in the House of Representatives. Americans need to elect Joe Biden as the 46th President of the United States.  

   

     Progressive voters across our nation cannot botch up the works as some of them did in 2016.  If progressives had abandoned Bernie Sanders early on in the 2016 campaign - or at least by March 1st when I wrote my column, SAY GOODBYE BERNIE, as he knew then that he couldn't win the nomination - former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would more than likely be President.  But Sanders didn't even endorse Secretary Clinton until July 12th.  By then it was too late, and combined with 

Russia's interference in our election, as well as former FBI director James Comey's October 28th letter to Congress eleven days before that election, Mrs. Clinton was unable to get the votes she needed to stop an Electoral College victory for Donald Trump.  Below are the comments I wrote nearly five months ago, albeit with a few edits and a couple of additional remarks, all of which are even more applicable today.

   

     Regular readers of The Controversy are well aware that I identify myself as an ultraprogressive liberal Democrat.  That being said, though, I actively and aggressively campaigned in 2016 for Hillary Clinton, not Bernie Sanders...and I'm often asked why. Many people wonder how I can be so madly in-love with politicians like Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, Hillary 

Clinton and Barack Obama (alphabetically) when none of them would be labeled by themselves or others as an ultraprogressive liberal Democrat. It's simple.  Because besides using those three words to describe myself, I also am realistic.  As long as the President is a Democrat, and he, or she, believes in the same basic liberal principles as I do, even though he or she may not necessarily be progressive with their ideas - or as some would call "far left" - I'm going to support that person who Democrats overall have nominated to be our candidate in the general election. In order for a Democrat to win in 2020, he or she needs to receive votes from not only the left, but from those closer to the center, and even those who - on certain issues - lean to the right.  Mr. Biden, Mr. Clinton, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. Obama are each in their own ways "liberal."  But it's not just policies that I have to be attracted to, but to the candidate as a person.  And after being nauseated by Donald Trump and his rally rants and Twitter tirades, Americans deserve a President - as we always have had in the past, prior to Trump - who brings decorum to The Oval Office.  Even President Richard Nixon - who made a destructive mistake for his presidency by covering up the Watergate scandal - remained a gentleman.  Although Mr. Nixon resigned his office in disgrace on August 9th, 1974, he still was tremendously successful as President, and some of his accomplishments were historic.  Now I don't want anyone to take my praise for our 37th President to in any way excuse him for his unlawful actions, for deceiving the American people, and for spearheading a 

conspiracy to cover-up a felony. President Nixon concealed a crime, and he lied to all of America when on November 17th, 1973, he infamously stated, "I'm not a crook."  But of course he was. However, that being said, Donald Trump is the most dishonest, fraudulent and corrupt U.S. President that America has ever known.  Trump makes Richard Nixon smell like a fragrant springtime bouquet of fresh White House Rose Garden flowers.

     I have criticized Donald Trump for more than four years; since he first became a candidate.  Trump's ruthless and reckless demeanor, and his obscene and obnoxious temperament, illustrate the behavior of someone who is morally and ethically unfit to serve as President of the United States. A person who is offensive and degrading, who treats others in a racist and/or xenophobic manner, who is hurtful, derogatory and repulsive, and who can be bigoted and belittling in ways that Trump has proven to be, are not attributes that are in any way part of my DNA.  For those reasons and others, I am, therefore, without question not cut from the same bolt of fabric as Donald Trump or anyone who continues to be one of his cheerleaders. Theirs is a tattered and torn polyester rag, while I've been blessed with pure cashmere.  Beyond the contrasting values, we paint a different portrait of what the President of the United States should represent.  I have to be attracted to a candidate's character.  Character means much more to me than the politics.  If any Democrat was to ever speak out with wickedly evil insults as Trump has done over and over again, I would never, ever, support that person. And if such a candidate was one who I did promote, but later he or she became a venomous vulture voicing vile verbiage, I would pull my endorsement like a slab of Atlantic City saltwater taffy.

     Unacceptable conduct cannot be tolerated. Voters should never applaud anyone who has engaged in hate, as too many people in our country have done with Donald Trump.  As Aaron Sorkin wrote for Michael Douglas when he portrayed the fictional President Andrew Shepherd in the 1995 motion picture, The American President, "I can tell you without hesitation, being President of this country, is entirely about character."

   

     So why do I continue to support candidates who aren't as far to the left as I am? There is no law that says an ultraprogressive liberal Democrat is required to vote for an ultraprogressive liberal Democrat.  After all, most Democrats are not ultraprogressive or ultraliberal.  To quote Vice President Biden, "If you look at all the polling data, and look at the actual results, the fact of the matter is, the vast majority of the members of the Democratic Party are still basically liberal to moderate Democrats in the traditional sense."  Mr. Biden made that comment to reporters after a speech he gave on April 5th, 2019 in Washington, DC at the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers conference.  

   

      A candidate's character and core beliefs are what's absolutely essential to me, even if the person doesn't lean as far to the left as I do.  That's not to say that Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and other Democrats who are running for President don't have good character.  They do; each and every one of them.  Any Democrat who is in the race would be a better President than Donald Trump.  But then, Donald Duck would be a better President than Donald Trump. 

   

     I always thought that America's presidential election was designed to choose the best person to lead our country.  That of course didn't happen in 2016.  But in 2020 - more than ever before - this election needs to not only be about who is best, but who can beat the Republican, especially if that Republican is Donald Trump.  The Democrat who fits both categories is Joe Biden.

     And that's The Controversy for today.

     I'm Gary B. Duglin.

     "We'll talk again."

The Controversy is a publication of GBD Productions.  Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy is Gary B. Duglin.

Please express your personal opinions by following the instructions printed at the top of this column.  And thank you for reading The Controversy.

Photo credits: 

1 - AFP/Getty Images (Former Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Elizabeth Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders)

2 - Thaier al-Sudani/Reuters (Former Vice President Joe Biden wearing sunglasses)

3 - Brian Snyder/Jim Young/Reuters/Salon (Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders)

4 - NBC News and Today Screenshot (Former FBI Director James Comey)

5 - The Associated Press/Getty Images/Alamy (Former President Barack Obama, Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Former President Bill Clinton)

6 - Twitter (Former President Barack Obama and Former Vice President Joe Biden)

7 - The Associated Press (Former President Richard Nixon)

8 - Reuters (Donald Trump)

9 - IMDb (Aaron Sorkin)

10 - Columbia Pictures/Universal Pictures/Castle Rock Entertainment/Wildwood Enterprises (Michael Douglas in The American President)

11 - Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images (Former Vice President Joe Biden talks with reporters)

12 - The Walt Disney Company/Alamy (Donald Duck)

13 - Nathan Congleton/NBC News/NBC Universal/Getty Images (Former Vice President Joe Biden) 

Copyright 2019 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net.  All Rights Reserved.

RESIGNATION FOR DONALD TRUMP IS HIS SAFEST OPTION TO STAY OUT OF PRISON

After reading this editorial, please express your own thoughts.  At the bottom, please click on the word "Comments" below the copyright and type your remarks in the box.  When finished,  please click on the word "Publish."  Please also share a link to this column with others in your e-mail directory and on social media.

This copyrighted column - in part or in its entirety - may be freely shared among individuals, and it may be reprinted, republished, or quoted in any medium, including broadcast, cable, satellite, print, Internet, and other forms of media, but only when crediting Gary B. Duglin and The Controversy.
 The Controv     

     Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump led chants of "Lock her up" at his political rallies.  He pledged, if he became President, to put Hillary Clinton behind bars. But of course Trump had no honest reason, no logical or legitimate grounds, to throw the former Secretary of State and his Democratic

opponent in jail because she did absolutely nothing illegal.  Mrs. Clinton committed no crimes and, unlike Trump, Secretary Clinton was, in fact, fully exonerated by the FBI, by numerous prosecutors, and by Congress.  All that being said, Trump has spent the better part of his term in The White House attacking other Democrats, yet he continues to verbally abuse Mrs. Clinton and former President Barack Obama, neither of whom is currently running for

any political office.  Trump has also threatened journalists with the words "Lock them up."  There will be a day, however - and I believe it is coming sooner rather than later - when the guy wearing handcuffs and an orange jumpsuit will be Donald Trump.

     I have written for nearly three years that Trump's Oval Office occupancy would end similar to Richard Nixon's presidency. Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's 22-month investigation of Russia's interference in to America's 2016 election, and allegations of obstruction of justice by Trump - along with accusations for an assortment of other criminal charges against him - have convinced, to date, according to a count from Politico, 137 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives who want to move forward with some form of impeachment.  Of those congressmen and congresswomen, they are all Democrats except for one Republican turned Independent.  The group represents more than half of the Democratic caucus.  But neither Speaker of the House Nancy

Pelosi, Democrat of California, nor her two top deputies - House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn of South Carolina - are in support of going ahead with such proceedings right now.  "We will proceed when we have what we need to proceed, not one day sooner," Pelosi told reporters before the summer recess.  And since returning to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, September 4th, 2019, there is no verification that Pelosi has changed her mind about launching a formal impeachment of Trump.  Nevertheless, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Democratic

Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York, has different thoughts and is rapidly engaged towards moving forward with an impeachment inquiry.  Congressman John Yarmuth, Democrat of Kentucky, says, "I would bet that before mid-October, there will be actual articles of impeachment drafted by the committee. I don't think there's much doubt about that.  I think

Jerry's committed to doing that, and I think a significant majority of the committee is there." Yarmuth was interviewed recently by Politico.  

     Thanks to The Mueller Report, Congress has much more of a head start today than our legislators had 45 years ago when President Nixon was under investigation.  In late July 1974, the House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Mr. Nixon for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress.  But before the full House could vote on the impeachment resolutions, the United States Supreme Court ordered the President to make public certain recorded conversations.  It was that tape - known as "The Smoking Gun" - which ultimately buried the Nixon presidency. It became obvious to our country that Mr. Nixon was not only involved in the Watergate cover-up, but that he led it.  As support from House and U.S. Senate

Republicans disappeared, America's 37th President resigned on August 9th, 1974.  It is widely believed that if Mr. Nixon had not taken that final step on his own, even though he was somewhat pushed by Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, who was the 1964 Republican nominee for President, along with the Republican leadership including Senate Minority

Leader Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania and House Minority Leader John Rhodes Jr. of Arizona, Mr. Nixon's impeachment by the House was inevitable, with conviction and removal from office a foregone conclusion as he simply did not have the votes to survive a trial in the Senate.

     It makes no sense to me that with all the evidence, which Mueller and his team gathered over their nearly 2-year probe, that none of the documentation is sufficient enough to be Trump's "smoking gun."  What more will it take?  What else is there?  Whatever it may be, I am confident that a Trump "smoking gun" will be unveiled in the not too distant future, and it's likely to come from former White House Counsel Don McGahn.  Although Donald Trump has pulled his strings to prevent McGahn from cooperating with the House, The Mueller Report clearly states that McGahn refused to follow orders issued by Trump, which McGahn described - by definition - as anywhere from "totally unsound" to "mentally deranged" and "insane."  I will explain and elaborate later in this column.

     Over the summer, Congressman Nadler's Judiciary Committee filed two lawsuits in federal court; one of which is to enforce a subpoena for McGahn to testify before Congress.  McGahn was instructed by Trump earlier this year to ignore the subpoena; actually to defy it.  Therefore, McGahn has not yet testified.  That's more fuel on the fire because Trump continues to obstruct justice by witness tampering.  This time, even though he no longer works for The White House, McGahn listened to Trump.  Nadler says McGahn's refusal to comply with the subpoena is "unlawful." White House lawyers, however, argue that McGahn - as a former senior aide to the President of the United States - can't be compelled to testify because his communications with Trump are of a confidential nature.  But Democrats want McGahn's testimony in an effort to put the icing on the cake that Trump obstructed justice, especially when he tried to fire Mueller as special counsel.  On Monday, August 27th, 2019, the House Judiciary Committee filed a motion to expedite the panel's lawsuit.  Mueller - who is also the former director of the FBI - did not, in any way, clear Trump of obstruction of justice.  Instead, Mueller hinted - basically suggested - that the matter be addressed by Congress.  Chairman Nadler also wants to receive - with the second lawsuit - all grand jury material from Mueller's investigation in to Russian meddling in the 2016 election.  Mueller did not hold back during his congressional testimony when he plainly noted that Trump was elected with the unquestionable assistance of Vladimir Putin's agents.  

     To consider impeachment, Nadler's lawsuit seeking the grand jury material specifies, "Because Department of Justice policies will not allow prosecution of a sitting President, the United States House of Representatives is the only institution of the Federal Government that can now hold (Donald) Trump accountable for these actions.  To do so, the House must have access to all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its full Article I powers, including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity --- approval of articles of impeachment."  As for the McGahn filing, it also discusses that for the Judiciary Committee to "recommend articles of impeachment against (Trump), based on the obstructive conduct described by the Special Counsel," it is imperative to receive McGahn's sworn testimony in order to proceed.  Even though Speaker Pelosi has not given a green light to go full speed ahead with impeachment, Time magazine says, according to aides, that she did sign-off on the strong language that was used in Nadler's legal action.  It's quite possible that the grand jury material and/or McGahn's testimony might provide the definitive

"smoking gun" that is necessary for Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky to make like Barry Goldwater did with Richard Nixon and pressure Trump to resign, as concrete evidence against Trump - including the possibility of anything tangible such as recordings, emails, or other written notes - would seal the deal for impeachment, conviction and removal from office. 


     When he testified on Wednesday, July 24th, 2019 before two congressional committees - the House Judiciary Committee and the House Intelligence Committee - I wanted to see Robert Mueller - in plain English - blow a cork.  But should that have been necessary? Absolutely not. However, the people of our country are so angry - we are all so...pissed off - on both sides, that the impression is that if Americans in the year 2019 don't witness a dramatic performance - no matter who it is that's on the political stage - then it doesn't seem to sink into their psyche that a problem exists.

     For the most part, Mueller gave yes or no answers, or he completely declined to answer questions, throughout the 7-hour marathon session that was broadcast live on national television.  To hear Mueller merely provide us with responses in the form of "true," or "correct," wasn't going to give him the "Academy Award" for this movie version of his 448-page book.  Despite the fact that the official policy of the Office of Legal Counsel in the U.S. Department of Justice does not allow for the President

of the United States to be indicted, Mueller's script (The Mueller Report) does deserve the statue.  But the late Siskel & Ebert would never have given Mueller's performance "two thumbs up," as his "acting" - along with the "film" itself - lacked four stars.

     At both congressional hearings, Mueller did not defend his work, his investigation, and his report the way I wanted him to defend it.  Don't get me wrong. I don't think the former FBI director's strategy had to include an explosive presentation, but Americans needed to hear Mueller speak, under oath, that if Donald Trump was not sitting behind The Oval Office desk, he would be indicted.  As I described in my column of June 13th, 2019, "Oh I realize that he wants his report to 'speak for itself' and, therefore, speak for him, but as the idiom indicates, human beings need to hear something 'straight from the horse's mouth,' not from a redacted, typewritten report."  Plus, as others throughout the media have also expressed, not everyone has read The Mueller Report cover to cover - or even one word of it - and I, among others had hoped that by "watching the  

movie," although they didn't "read the book," those Americans who are swaying in the breeze, uncertain whether Trump has broken laws or not, would be convinced by an Oscar-worthy performance by Mueller that Trump is indeed a crook.  Unfortunately, the film version needed either Tom Hanks to sit in and portray Mueller, or Steven Spielberg to direct him.  It was President Nixon who infamously denied his involvement in the Watergate cover-up when, on November 17th, 1973, he shouted in a nationally televised press conference, "I am not a crook."  But of course...he was.   

     Democrats, Independents, and yes, even some Republicans who are on the fence, wobbling and wondering if they should continue to endorse Donald Trump, needed to hear Robert Mueller - under sworn testimony - vocalize what he wrote in his report that Trump, a subject in the investigation, attempted to put a stop to the Justice Department's probe by firing Mueller.  "On June 17th, (2017) the president called (White House Counsel Don) McGahn at home and directed him to call the acting attorney general (Rod Rosenstein)" and that because of "conflicts of interest" the special counsel "must be removed.  McGahn did not carry out the direction, however, he decided that he would resign rather than trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday Night Massacre."  That name is popularly tagged to a series of events - including the termination of prosecutors - that took place on October 20th, 1973 during the Richard Nixon presidency and the Watergate scandal.  

    

     The Mueller Report goes on to tell us that instead of confronting Rosenstein - who was the only person, by law, who could actually fire Mueller - McGahn approached then-White House chief of staff Reince Priebus and told him that Trump had instructed him to "do crazy shit."  "Crazy" is defined by the Random House Unabridged Dictionary as "totally unsound," "mentally deranged," and "insane." Thus my remark earlier in this editorial is appropriate.  The Mueller Report continues to state, "In early 2018, the press (specifically The New York Times) reported that the president had directed McGahn to have the special counsel removed in June 2017 and that McGahn had threatened to resign rather than carry out the order.  The president reacted to the news stories by directing White House officials to tell McGahn to dispute the story and create a record stating he had not been ordered to have the special counsel removed.  McGahn told those officials that the media reports were accurate in stating that the president had directed McGahn to have the special counsel removed.  The president then met with McGahn in The Oval Office and again pressured him to deny the reports.  In the same meeting, the president also asked McGahn why he had told the special counsel about the president's effort to remove the special counsel and why McGahn took notes of his conversations with the president.  McGahn refused to back away from what he remembered happening and perceived the president to be testing his mettle."  McGahn didn't leave the Trump administration until October 17th, 2018, but according to The Mueller Report, at one point, Trump referred to McGahn as a "lying bastard."  The Mueller Report 

says, after Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel, Trump - from The Oval Office on May 17th, 2017 - told then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had recused himself from the probe, "Oh my God.  This is terrible.  This is the end of my presidency.  I'm fucked.  How could you let this happen, Jeff?  You were supposed to protect me. This is the worst thing that ever happened to me." 

     It's always about you, isn't it, Donald?  Well you have no clue what it means to be President of the United States.  Although you may think so, Donald, you are not above the law, and the attorney general is to protect the American people, not you alone.  He is not your personal lawyer.  The attorney general's job is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.  He's not in business to save your butt when you screw up.  One doesn't need to have a law degree to realize that Trump's orders to McGahn, and his comments to Sessions, are tantamount to obstruction of justice.

     It was essential for voters to hear Robert Mueller - in his own voice - tell us that Trump intimidated people to lie for him, and that obstructing justice and witness tampering are federal crimes whereby a person can be shuttled off to prison for a very long time.  I still believe that Americans are desperate to give their full attention to Mueller's words, but only when - for instance - each syllable flows off his tongue

with distinct clarity.  Another example would be for Mueller to eloquently articulate that Donald Trump Jr. conspired with Russians to get dirt on his father's Democratic challenger, Hillary Clinton. This was the meeting that was arranged following a June 3rd, 2016 email that was sent to Trump Jr. by British publicist and family friend Rob Goldstone, who

wrote, "The crown prosecutor of Russia...offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.  This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Seventeen minutes later, Trump Jr. replied to Goldstone.  "(I)f it's what you say I love it especially in the summer."  

     The Mueller Report explains that Donald Trump "directed aides not to publicly disclose the emails setting up the June 9th meeting, suggesting that the emails would not leak and that the number of lawyers with access to them should be limited.  Before the emails became public, (Trump) edited a press statement for Trump Jr. by deleting a line that acknowledged that the meeting was with 'an individual who (Trump Jr.) was told might have information helpful to the campaign' and instead said only that the meeting was about adoptions of Russian children. When the press asked questions about (Trump's) involvement in Trump Jr.'s statement, (Trump's) personal lawyer repeatedly denied (Trump) had played any role."  As I wrote in my column of July 14th, 2017, "Donald Trump Jr. says his dad knew nothing about the e-mails or the subsequent meeting with the Russian attorney.  Therefore, he and Trump Sr. want me - as well as the rest of our country - to believe that the Trump patriarch had no knowledge of that meeting, which happened to be held at Trump Tower in New York City, one floor below Trump Sr.'s office.  If you think that Trump Jr. didn't tell his father about the meeting - either sometime before or immediately after it - then you believe that monkeys can fly." Meeting with a foreign adversary - and creating a cover-up - should have been all the conspiracy ("collusion" is not a legal term) that Congress needed to be made aware of, to impeach, convict, and remove Trump from office.

     Donald Trump is the supreme megalomaniac who wants the whole world to wrap around him.  He is synonymous to a domestic terrorist who feels that because he has a gun, he's able to do whatever he wants to do.  Trump uses the power of the presidency - or what he thinks is the power of the presidency - in an attempt to escalate an agenda that is reckless and irrational.  Trump's narcissistic manner is beyond troubling, extremely disturbing, and terribly dangerous.  As I have written for many years, Trump is mentally and morally unbalanced.  His instability is destructive and he is unfit to serve as President of the United States.

     Will one or more of the many people who worked for Donald Trump in his administration and who either resigned, was forced to quit, or was fired, have the integrity and the courage to advise - nay warn - the American people before the 2020 primary season gets underway that they want the public to know the absolute truth about Trump's lack of fitness, and that he should not be on the ballot for the general election?  Who - with credibility - has the balls to do that?

     In late August of this year, Donald Trump further demonstrated that he is out of control and is the worst President in U.S. history when he humiliated our country - actually disgraced us - by refusing to participate in a global panel on climate change at the G7 summit in France.  Furthermore, Trump put a bulls eye on immigrant families when he threatened to abolish birthright citizenship; despite the fact that 

it's outlined in the U.S. Constitution as a basic right. Trump's bromance with Vladimir Putin leaped to a higher platform when "The Donald" lobbied for Russia and his Moscow spy buddy to be readmitted to the G7.  The largest country in the world (by area) was booted out of the G7 for invading its neighboring nation, Ukraine.  And, believe it or not, Trump recently floated the idea for America to drop nuclear bombs on hurricanes.  Axios first reported that "Trump suggested multiple times to senior Homeland Security and national security officials that they explore using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes from hitting the United States, according to sources who have heard (Trump's) private remarks and been briefed on a National Security Council memorandum that recorded those comments.  During one hurricane briefing at The White House, Trump said, 'I got it.  I got it.  Why don't we nuke them?' according to one source who was there.  'They start forming off the coast of Africa, as they're moving across the Atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it.  Why can't we do that?' the source added, paraphrasing (Trump's) 

remarks."  Trump wants to take credit for an idea that dates back to when President Dwight D. Eisenhower was sitting behind The Oval Office desk and the notion was thought of by a U.S. government scientist.  However, meteorologists and other weather science experts worldwide have for decades maintained that such a plan would not be successful.

     As with everything Trump, Republicans on Capitol Hill remain his cheerleaders, and even if they publicly - or privately - disagree with Trump, GOP members - and Republicans across the United States - no matter what, will defend Trump.  Let's remember that on January 23rd, 2016, at a campaign rally in Iowa, Trump boasted about his loyal supporters.  "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters."  I sometimes ask myself, what would his base do if Trump actually did fire a bullet at someone on a Manhattan street?  They probably would claim that he had a good and justifiable reason for pulling the trigger. It's a sickening thought that is tragically, but probably, true. 

     If the vast majority of Americans want Trump to take a hike, the Republican-controlled Senate would have to agree with the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives in order to perform the ultimate; to evict Trump from the presidential mansion.  One would expect that to happen in a sane, sensible world.  But we don't live in a sane, sensible world.  We live in a disgusting, vengeful world, and while Donald Trump represents the United States of America, he is unfortunately guiding that vengeance and spearheading a movement of hostility. 

     Trump continues to lie through his teeth.  He is compulsive, deceptive, and delusive.  All he wants is revenge because honesty and trust are not words in his vocabulary.  If you want the truth about The Mueller Report, I encourage you to read it.  Take heed to the evidence and the facts, not the anger of a defiant Donald Trump.

     Trump misled the Mueller investigation and contradicted the special counsel.  He was relentless with his rhetoric that the Mueller probe was a "hoax" and a "witch hunt."  Trump has incorrectly bragged that Special Counsel Mueller exonerated him. More accurately, Trump lied.  But for the truth, read the following exchange from the video transcript of the House Judiciary Committee hearing.

     Chairman Jerry Nadler:  "Director Mueller, the president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction, and that it completely and totally exonerated him.  But that is not what your report said, is it?"

     Mueller:  "Correct, that is not what the report said."

     Nadler:  "Did you actually, totally exonerate the president?"

     Mueller:  "No."   

     At the House Intelligence Committee hearing that followed on that same day, it's chairman, Congressman Adam Schiff of California, presented other questions to Mueller, which blasts Trump for lying.

     Schiff:  "Your investigation is not a 'witch hunt,' is it, Director Mueller?"

     Mueller:  "It is not a witch hunt."

     Schiff:  "When the president said the Russian interference was a 'hoax,' that was false, wasn't it?"

     Mueller:  "True."  

     Every time Donald Trump lies he goes against his presidential oath of office.  The Washington Post says that since Inauguration Day on January 20th, 2017, Trump has made "more than 12,000 false or misleading claims."  One of Trump's biggest lies is denying that he was in the thick of it when he and his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen discussed paying "hush money" to two women who Trump allegedly had sexual, extra-marital affairs with between 2006 and 2007, shortly after 

his current wife, Melania Trump, gave birth to their son, Barron Trump.  Trump Republicans call Cohen the liar, even though he was under oath when he testified that Trump ordered him to commit crimes. But federal prosecutors from the Southern District of New York - along with a federal district court judge - came to the conclusion, as a result of Cohen's testimony and other evidence, that Trump "coordinated and directed" Cohen to pay $130,000 

to porn star Stormy Daniels, and that in concert with David Pecker - the chief executive officer of American Media Inc. - Trump arranged for AMI to pay $150,000 to Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal. Cohen testified that Trump was "in the room" when the AMI/Pecker deal was made.  AMI publishes the National Enquirer.  The bottom line is that both women - Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, and McDougal - could have hurt, damaged, or completely destroyed the Trump campaign, thus 

the reason for the covert currency. And Cohen, testifying before Congress, showed our country and the world the proof - in the form of at least one check signed by Donald Trump - that Trump, in fact, reimbursed Cohen for the money he laid out to pay Daniels.  Cohen is currently incarcerated for campaign finance violations and other criminal offenses.  His 3-year prison sentence is, in part, related to his involvement in the "hush money" payments to Daniels and McDougal. 

     The law is very clear.  Therefore, it is indisputable that Trump is blatantly guilty of campaign finance violations for being a party to - with his own money and others - payoffs for more than one-quarter of a million dollars, in order to keep the lips zipped of the aforementioned females, so that their alleged sexual encounters with Trump would stay hidden from voters.

     I am convinced that Trump's planned schemes about the Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal matters were designed to specifically deceive voters so they would not know of Trump's immoral infidelity, which - if discovered before the 2016 election - would have influenced certain voters' decisions and, therefore, enough Americans in specific states would have not pulled the lever for Trump, which would have affected the outcome in the Electoral College vote in those states, thus causing Trump to lose the election and Hillary Clinton to win.  Americans needed to hear Robert Mueller call Trump the name he is identified as in federal court documents - "Individual 1" - and we needed to hear Mueller echo what he wrote in his report that Trump paid "hush money" to the women.  Legal experts and constitutional scholars say Trump broke the law because paying Daniels and McDougal was premeditated betrayal intended to trick voters.  In other words...it was fraud.  And that's a felony, which is an impeachable offense. 

     Donald Trump's brainwashed base of nationwide Republicans, who have worshiped him on his pedestal of profanity for more than four years (including, for some, the early days of his campaign) are thinking - wrong as they are - that the investigation in to Trump is done and over.  To believe such nonsense is illogical and downright foolish.  Democrats will not stop until Americans are provided the entire truth. Accordingly, House Democrats are determined to unravel any mystery.  All questions need to be answered, including - but not limited to - Trump's pre-election payments to Daniels and McDougal.  Meanwhile, on Tuesday, September 3rd, 2019, Daniels tweeted that she is prepared to testify before Congress and that she will tell the truth.  "I have no fear of being under oath because I have been and will be honest. Bring it!"

     To this day, I am still baffled that after the infamous 2005 Access Hollywood video was released on October 7th, 2016, about a month before the election, how any woman - and for that matter, any man who respects women - could cast their ballot for Donald Trump.  It was on that tape when Trump grandstanded about his sexcapades - allegedly with television personality Nancy O'Dell, among others - and blew his own horn to Access Hollywood's then-host, Billy Bush.

     "I moved on her, actually.  You know she was down on Palm Beach.  I moved on her...and I failed.  I'll admit it.  I did try and fuck her.  She was married.  No, no, Nancy.  No this was...and I moved on her very heavily.  In fact, I took her furniture shopping.  She wanted to get some furniture.  I said, 'I'll show you where they have some nice furniture.'  I took her out furniture...  I moved on her like a bitch.  But I couldn't get there.  And she was married.  Then all of a sudden, I see her.  She's now got the big phony tits and everything.  She's totally changed her look."
    

     The conversation continued as the Access Hollywood bus arrived at NBC studios in Burbank, California and Trump noticed actress Arianne Zucker who he was meeting that day to videotape a scene with her on Days Of Our Lives.
 
     "Yeah, that's her...with the gold.  I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her.  You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful...  I just start kissing them.  It's like a magnet.  Just kiss. I don't even wait.  And when you're a star, they let you do it.  You can do anything." Billy Bush replied..."Whatever you want."  And Trump uttered the line that nobody should forget.  "Grab 'em by the pussy.  You can do anything."

     I don't believe Donald Trump cares about anything but himself and money. However, that said, if Trump does at all care about the United States of America, as he insists he does, then Donald...here's my personal message to you.  Get the hell out of The White House.  Vacate the premises.  Go away!  You're an embarrassment to our country.  RESIGN!  

     If Trump was as "smart" as he claims to be - which he is not - he would leave the presidency and hope that Mike Pence, as the new President, pardons him for all federal crimes.  Otherwise, if Trump doesn't quit, and he continues his 2020 campaign and loses to a Democrat - which I hope and think he would - federal prosecutors can and will indict Trump on felony charges.  If convicted - which I believe he more than likely would be - Trump would go to prison.  Americans will see a then-former President of the United States locked up behind bars.  Trump's base should think about these facts and the added embarrassment to our nation on the world stage.  Trump himself should certainly put such thoughts in the forefront of his mind.

     It should be also known that if Trump doesn't resign, or he's not impeached, convicted and removed from office, but is re-elected next year, by the time his second term would be completed, the statute of limitations would prevent him from being prosecuted.  Therefore, if Trump escapes resignation or any constitutional congressional process, if justice is to be served, it is crucial for Americans to vote for the Democratic nominee on Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020.  As I did months ago, I continue to endorse and embrace - "hug" if you will - former Vice President Joe Biden.

     So will voters hand Donald Trump a second term as president?  Or will Americans someday witness Trump in a pair of handcuffs...after being sentenced...to a prison term?

     And that's The Controversy for today.

     I'm Gary B. Duglin.

     "We'll talk again." 

The Controversy is a publication of GBD Productions.  Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy is Gary B. Duglin.

Please express your personal opinions by following the instructions printed at the top of this column.  And thank you for reading The Controversy.

Photo credits:

1 - Joe Raedle/Getty Images (Donald Trump)
2 - Justin Sullivan/Getty Images (Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton)
3 - Streeter Lecka/Getty Images (Former President Barack Obama)
4 - Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi)
5 - The Associated Press (House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn)d 
6 - CNN Screenshot (House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler)
7 - Jeff Faughender/The Courier-Journal (Congressman John Yarmuth)
8 - The Associated Press (Former President Richard Nixon)
9 - The Republic (Former Senator Barry Goldwater, Former Senate Minority Leader Hugh Scott and Former House Minority Leader John Rhodes Jr.)
10 - Leah Millis/Reuters (Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell)
11 - Andrew Harnik/The Associated Press (Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller)
12 - Ron Galella/WireImage (Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert)
13 - Getty Images (Tom Hanks)
14 - David Buchan/Shutterstock (Steven Spielberg)
15 - Alexander Drago/Reuters (Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein)
16 - Mary Altaffer/The Associated Press (Former White House Counsel Don McGahn and Former White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus)
17 - Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions)
18 - Richard Drew/The Associated Press (Donald Trump Jr.)
19 - NBC News Screenshot (Rob Goldstone)
20 - Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images (Russia's President Vladmir Putin)
21 - Getty Images (Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower)
22 - Kevin Dietsch/United Press International (House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff)
23 - Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (Michael Cohen)
24 - Peter Brooker/REX/Shutterstock (Melania Trump and Barron Trump) 
25 - Marion Curtis/The Associated Press (David Pecker)
26 - Ethan Miller and Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images/AFP (Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal)
27 - PBS (Donald Trump's check to Michael Cohen)
28 - Carlo Allegri/Getty Images (Nancy O'Dell)
29 - Access Hollywood (Now Access)/NBCUniversal (Donald Trump, Billy Bush and Arianne Zucker)
30 - Getty Images (Mike Pence)
31 - Nathan Congleton/NBC News/NBCUniversal/Getty Images (Former Vice President Joe Biden)

Copyright 2019 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net.  All Rights Reserved.