We are not going to comment on the planned release, simply because by the time you read this it may well be out and we have no idea what is in it anymore than anyone else. What we will present is just some of the questions and off shoots of this action to do the inquiry:
First, what does Nancy Pelosi know about this that suddenly she is willing to proceed? After being cautious the entire time, why now? There is something there. The argument is, was it wrong?
Second, what does this mean for congress doing real work? Are they really not going to pass USMCA? Are they really going to focus here and not on gun control?
Third, if you were China or North Korea would you want to make a deal now? You know the next person will not be as tough as Trump.
Fourth, what does this release do to future presidential calls knowing the content may be released? In the past leaders could have straight talk. This will harm that.
The risks for both sides here:
The thought now is this will likely bring a set of articles charging the president with high crimes and misdemeanors. This will end up with a vote on impeachment articles on the House floor. Thus the full House will get a chance this year to cast a vote or a set of votes about whether the president committed crimes worthy of his removal.
This could be dangerous for the Democrats if the evidence is not solid and it comes across as partisan.
Let’s see what the release brings. Maybe it’s like we said last week, both sides are right. There was a discussion of something, and what did Biden and family do? Does anyone care about the latter from the left? I haven’t seen it if they do.
Though not related to today’s release, this is related to the whole Mueller investigation and charges from the outset.
A judge overturned guilty verdicts against Trump transition adviser on foreign-agent charges. The federal judge overturned guilty verdicts a jury returned against a business partner of Gen. Michael Flynn over work the pair did for Turkish interests during the Trump presidential campaign in 2016.
He ruled that prosecutors put forward insufficient proof to sustain the finding that (Rafiekian) knowingly operated as a Turkish government agent and intentionally failed to notify U.S. officials about his work.