Remember that infamous meeting that occurred at Trump Tower between Donald Jr. and some Russians. Oh, yeah—and Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner were there too. You could’ve heard the Democrats licking their lips. Some Democrats even said this was the tip of the iceberg. In the end, it was a nothingburger. The meeting lasted less than 30 minutes, it was a colossal waste of time, and no 2016 election business was discussed. Oh, but the meeting was reportedly set up under the pretenses that this crew had dirt on Hillary Clinton. Yeah, and it was a total lie. The Left lobbed the calls of treason and once again, the Left was wrong. This meeting was not treasonous.
And funny how this little rendezvous all but vanished from the news cycle when this whole meeting turned out be yet another example of the liberal media overreaching. So, how can one resurrect this story in a completely insane light? Well, that would be Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), the House Judiciary chair, who peddled straight lies about the meeting on Meet The Press last Sunday. He said Trump Jr. received secret intelligence. Uh, that’s not true. The Daily Caller took a hatchet to this lie, while also asking why didn’t MSNBC Chuck Todd:
WATCH: Should Mueller have charged anyone for meeting with Russians in Trump Tower? #MeetThePress #IfItsSunday@repjerrynadler: "I do not understand why he didn't charge Don Jr. and others in that famous meeting." pic.twitter.com/2h0c3Mfimp— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) April 21, 2019
I do not understand why he didn’t charge Don Jr., and others in that famous meetings with criminal conspiracy,” Nadler said of special counsel Robert Mueller in the interview.
“They entered into a meeting of the minds to attend a meeting, to get stolen material on Hillary. They went to the meeting. That’s conspiracy, right there,” he added.
Despite that claim, Trump Jr. was not offered stolen material before accepting the June 9, 2016 meeting.
Trump Jr. accepted the meeting after a music publicist named Rob Goldstone emailed him on June 3, 2016 saying that a Russian attorney wanted to meet with the campaign to provide information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s possible ties to Russia.
Goldstone said that the lawyer “offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia.”
But nowhere did Goldstone claim that the information about Clinton was stolen.
It was later revealed that information contained in a memo that the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, took into the meeting was compiled by Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that was hired by the DNC and Clinton campaign to investigate Donald Trump.
Yeah, you can see where this whole story fell apart. Not to mention what they really wanted to discuss was the Magnitsky Act. If anything, there’s more evidence that there was Clinton-Russia collusion with Fusion GPS and the Steele Dossier, but that’s a tale for another time.
For now, we’re saddled with the Democrats still reeling over the fact that they have nothing to impeach Trump with that’s remotely within the realm of possibility or reality. He beat Hillary in the 2016 race. That’s their reason. With no collusion, which was proven definitively by the Mueller report—a fact that roughly half the country knew from the get-go—the Left will shoot for the gold medal in linguistic gymnastics by trying to prove obstruction of justice in an investigation where no crime was committed. The evidence to prove such an allegation: more hot air from self-righteous liberals who think whatever they say on television is evidence. That’s CNN’s model. Some ex-Obama spokesperson says its obstruction and therefore that…proves it. There are not enough eyerolls. This will be the nauseating cycle for the next few weeks, maybe months. Democrats will toss around impeachment like a loaded gun and there will be an accidental discharge. Stay clear, folks. As Rich Lowry wrote, the Left has reached further into the realm of psychosis on this front:
When you are desperate to, in the memorable words of Democratic freshman congresswoman Rashida Tlaib “impeach this mother—,” any rationale will do.
If House Democrats impeach Trump, though, they will be sorely disappointed. They will wake up the day afterward and after all the drama and wall-to-wall coverage, he’ll still be president of the United States, tweeting per usual.
Nancy Pelosi, who has bizarrely become the backstop of reason in Democratic politics, is reluctant to go down this path. The question is whether she will get swamped by her base, just as the Republican House leadership did in 1998.
Give into it, Democrats. Please! We know you want to—and we all know what the results will be: A second term for Trump.