AOC’s candid comments on motivation behind Dem’s impeachment push raises eyebrows

(File Photo: screenshot)

The impeachment jig is officially up, all thanks to loudmouth socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Speaking on CNN after the Democrats’ first, arguably unsuccessful impeachment hearing Wednesday evening, the congresswoman was accused of admitting the true purposes behind her party’s efforts.

Listen:


(Source: CNN)

At the end of the day, we have to be able to come together as a caucus, and if it is this Ukrainian allegation that is what brings the caucus together, um, then I think we have to run with however we unify the House,” she said to host Wolf Blitzer.

Purpose #1: To unify the fractured Democrat Party?

“And so while I believe personally that we should be pursuing and investigating quite flagrant abuses of the Emoluments Clause, even reportedly as recently as the suspicious stops at Trump proprieties … in foreign trips, I think that all of this is game for investigation,” she continued.

“We also need to move quite quickly because we’re talking about the potential compromise of the 2020 elections. And so this is not just about something that has occurred; this is about preventing a potentially disastrous outcome from occurring next year.”

Purpose #2: To prevent Trump’s reelection?

Her words made it seem as if, though she personally believes President Donald Trump is guilty of certain high crimes, the overarching purposes of the ongoing impeachment debacle are to unify the Democrat Party and prevent the president’s reelection.

GOP chief of staff Richard Walters was one of many to jump on AOC’s statements.

Twitter screengrab.

Regarding the second purpose, keep in mind that, given the wider context of her full conversation with Blitzer, it can be fairly argued that the “disastrous outcome” she’d been referring to was possible election interference or more alleged Trump corruption.

Listen to her full statement below:

 

But even if that were true, it’d still be a problematic statement for a couple of notable reasons.

One, former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged Russian collusion failed to establish that the president and his campaign had colluded with foreign operatives to affect the 2016 presidential election.

And two, attempts by Russia to influence elections here and abroad have been occurring for decades and will not stop anytime soon, even if Trump is impeached.

“Russia has been intervening in foreign elections for decades,” The Washington Post conceded in a report published at the very start of 2018, adding that the interference began in 1991 and has continued nonstop since.

“Shortly after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Russia began to interfere in elections of the countries that had been part of the U.S.S.R. … In the past three years [2014-2017], Russian interference has expanded into such countries as the United States, Germany, France and Britain, among others,” the Post’s report continued.

These facts seem to lend credence to the theory that the impeachment drive is meant solely to drum up support for Democrats going into a tough 2020 presidential election.

It’s a theory that’s been bandied about by both the president’s allies and his 2020 campaign.

“Democrats can’t beat President Donald Trump on his policies or his stellar record of accomplishment, so they’re trying to turn a Joe Biden scandal into a Trump problem,” the campaign said in a statement back in September.

“The misguided Democrat impeachment strategy is meant to appease their rabid, extreme, leftist base, but will only serve to embolden and energize President Trump’s supporters and create a landslide victory for the President.”

But AOC’s statements, which again can be interpreted in multiple ways, aren’t the only evidence suggesting that there’s merit to this theory.

Back in May, long before Trump’s July 25th phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, a Texas Democrat admitted to being concerned that unless Trump were to be impeached, he’d win re-election in 2020.

I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected,” Rep. Al Green bluntly confessed, before going on to claim how the president would then use this to argue that he’s been vindicated.

“If we don’t impeach him, he will say he’s been vindicated. He will say the Democrats had an overwhelming majority in the House and didn’t take up impeachment. He will say we have a constitutional duty to do it if it was there and we didn’t. He will say he’s been vindicated.”

During Wednesday’s hearing, House Oversight Committee ranking member Jim Jordan reportedly triggered liberal Democrats by bringing with him a sign containing the keywords from Green’s May statement.

Look:

According to the left, Jordan’s decision to only highlight Green’s first sentence was propagandist in nature:

It’s not clear why these same critics have never said anything about the myriads of left-wing media outlets who’ve purposefully cut out pieces of the infamous Trump-Zelensky call transcript to issue false accusations against the president.

It’s also unclear how the rest of Green’s statement disproves the argument that all he and his peers are interested in is winning elections next year.

Vivek Saxena

Senior Staff Writer
[email protected]

V. Saxena is a staff writer for BizPac Review with a decade of experience as a professional writer, and a lifetime of experience as an avid news junkie. He holds a degree in computer technology from Purdue University.
Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles