Schiff & Pelosi Change Impeachment Charges To ‘Thought Crimes’ In Desperation

Democrats on Capitol Hill have been in a fog of desperation after the first open hearing bombed. Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff know if they strike out today in the second hearing there is really no way forward. That’s why Pelosi and Schiff have changed the impeachment charges to “thought crimes.” They have lost their minds. If the president thought about doing a crime, then it’s just like he really did it. You don’t want to miss how they are selling this to Americans.

Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff (Photo Credit: Youtube/Screenshots)

Democrats have been scrambling following Wednesday’s lackluster public impeachment hearing, changing the so-called impeachable offenses. Now, since their last charge of “bribery” could not be proven, they say Trump is guilty of “attempted bribery.” 

That’s right, the Democrats believe that they are mind-readers. According to them, they are certain that they can prove President Trump thought about bribing Ukraine by withholding the military aid until they would investigate the Bidens.

Pelosi and Schiff call that “attempted bribery,” and they want you to believe it’s an impeachable offense according to the Constitution. 

Why are they so desperate? Well, it all has to do with what happened during the first impeachment hearing. Wednesday’s public impeachment hearing, which featured testimonies from acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor and senior State Department official George Kent, was deemed a bust by many, including Democrats.

“It was a total disaster for us,” one senior House Democrat aide told Breitbart News.

“It’s hearsay,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew (D-NJ) said of Taylor’s testimony. “It’s really difficult dealing with this because it’s he said-she said.”

Neither of the bureaucrats who testified was able to outline a clear case of wrongdoing by the president, and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) took the opportunity to mock House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) “star witness,” whose “clear understanding” came from layers of hearsay.

That’s why Pelosi and Schiff now want you to believe even if something never happened, it still can be a crime. It’s like a “thought” crime. 

This is exactly what we saw at the end of the last hearing after the GOP proved the Democrats’ arguments fell flat. Rep. Joaquin Castro gave us a preview of this new narrative with this line of questioning:

“So ambassadors, is attempted murder a crime?” he asked, repeating his question. “Is attempted murder a crime?”

“Attempted murder is a crime,” Taylor said.

“Is attempted robbery a crime?” he asked.

“Neither of us is a lawyer,” Taylor began before Castro interrupted.

“I think anyone in this room could answer that question,” he said.

“I’ll go out on a limb and say yes it is,” Taylor said.

“Is attempted extortion and bribery a crime?” Castro asked, trying to draw a parallel.

“I don’t know sir,” Taylor said.

Joel Pollack, who is a Harvard-educated attorney and the Editor at Large for Breibart, caught on to this scheme right away, and he cleared it up.

@JoaquinCastrotx is trying to get the witnesses to answer whether ‘attempted bribery’ is a crime. (They don’t know.) There WAS no attempted bribery, but regardless — the Constitution says that bribery itself, not the attempt, is impeachable,” tweeted Pollack.

Don’t tell Pelosi that “bribery” as defined under the Constitution for impeachment, speaks to the President receiving cash or value in return for taking an action for the benefit of a foreign power.

If paying for, or threatening to withhold payment of, taxpayer money to a foreign power in order to change their behavior was considered “bribery”; then the entire foreign policy of the United States for the past century was built on bribes.

The other glaring problem with claiming Trump was trying to “bribe” Ukraine for a Biden investigation: the president tells President Zelensky to get in touch with the Attorney General in regards to the Biden corruption. If it was bribery, the last person you’d want to be involved is the top law enforcement official in America.

Notice the Democrats also link the military aid to an investigation into Joe Biden? There is no evidence the two things are linked. It certainly is not anywhere in the transcript of the July 25 phone call.

They are also mixing up criminal law with impeachment. For impeachment based on the Constitution, it must be a clear cut case of bribery, not “attempted bribery.” 

The Democrats started to run with this ridiculous new narrative right after the first hearing bombed. This is the third time they have moved the goalposts. Remember when this was all about a “quid pro quo?” Then, right before the first hearing, they changed tactics and made it all about “bribery and extortion.”

Now, they change it to “attempted bribery.”

As for the “attempted bribery and extortion” narrative, another wrench has been thrown into the Democrats’ argument, as Breitbart reported:

Ukrainian foreign minister Vadym Prystaiko said Thursday that U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland had ‘never’ linked U.S. aid to Ukrainian investigations of the 2016 elections or the Biden’s role in stopping a probe of Burisma.

Even if President Trump held up military aid indefinitely and Ukraine started an investigation into the Bidens, those are not impeachable offenses. Not even close. 

All presidents use foreign aid as a bargaining chip. That’s part of “politicking.” And the real reason Trump held the Ukraine aid for 55 days had nothing to do with the Bidens. It had everything to do with the foreign policy principles Trump ran on. Who can forget Trump on the campaign trail complaining America is paying for everything and other countries are paying for nothing.

When it came to Ukraine, Jim Jordan cleared up what was really going on. 

“There was a delay on sending hard-earned tax dollars of the American people to Ukraine,” Jordan admitted. “We’re not talking any country, we’re talking Ukraine. Ernst & Young said one of the three most corrupt countries on the planet. … So our president said, ‘Time out. Time out, let’s check out this new guy. Let’s see if Zelensky’s the real deal. This new guy who got elected in April, whose party took power in July. Let’s see if he’s legitimate.'”

Jordan continued, “Now, keep in mind, in 2018 President Trump had already done more for Ukraine than Obama did. That’s right, President Trump — who doesn’t like foreign aid, who wanted European countries to do more, who knew how corrupt Ukraine was — did more than Obama because he gave them Javelins, tank-busting Javelins to fight the Russians. Our witnesses have said this, others have said this: ‘Obama gave them blankets, Trump gave them missiles.’ But when it came time to check out this new guy, President Trump said, ‘Let’s just see, let’s just see if he’s legit.'”

Even the Democrats’ witnesses backed up what Jordan said. This sounds exactly like Trump. The president doesn’t need Ukraine to find out what happened with the Bidens. He does need their help to find out what happened in the 2016 election with the Ukraine company CrowdStrike.

None of this is impeachable. The Democrats sound absolutely bonkers. We expect the second hearing today is going to be another bust, and we wouldn’t be shocked if by next week Nancy Pelosi cancels impeachment altogether.

About Rebecca Diserio, Opinion Columnist 942 Articles
Rebecca Diserio is a conservative writer and speaker who has been featured in numerous high profile publications. She's a graduate of St. Joseph High School in Lakewood, CA and worked as a Critical Care Registered Nurse at USC Medical Center. A former Tea Party spokesman, she helped manage Star Parker’s campaign for US Congress and hosted a popular conservative radio show where she interviewed Dr. Alveda King, Ann Coulter, David Limbaugh, and Michelle Malkin. A police widow, she resides in Southern California.