Tom Reed on impeachment

Impeachment is taking up … the airwaves and taking up the oxygen in the room. As I have publicly stated, and I’ll state here again, I do not support the impeachment process. I do not support the inquiry.–Rep. Tom Reed

Tom doesn’t favor investigation because he already knows there is no wrongdoing to find. He explains:

High crime, when you look at the constitution, are crimes that are generally subject to things like penalty of death (and) bribery in regards to selling out state secrets for personal financial gain. Those are the types of impeachable offenses that are envisioned in the constitution.

Tom’s argument is this:

  1. Only certain crimes justify impeachment.
  2. Those crimes can’t be proved.

These points are weak. There is nothing in The Constitution to justify the first; The Constitution pointedly leaves the question of what justifies impeachment open. Tom does list bribery, but then must ignore the fact that bribery (making military aid dependent on a favor) did occur. This second point is also weak because Tom would not look for evidence even of the crimes he says would justify impeachment.

David Graham, writing for The Atlantic, gives three arguments Republicans use:

  1. The president did nothing wrong.
  2. The president did something wrong, but it’s not an impeachable offense.
  3. The president did nothing wrong, but his advisers did. 
Tom Reed has taken the second position. About this Graham writes:
This is perhaps the simplest position to argue, since it allows members to concede that something is rotten without having to actually take the drastic step of backing impeachment.
Tom does leave himself wiggle room–he allows that bribery might justify impeachment and might some day choose to see that bribery did occur.


DAVID A. GRAHAM is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers U.S. politics and global news.


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Impeachment isn’t an ordinary trial

punditIf Caesar’s wife ought to be above suspicion, so should our President.

The idea that impeachment is like an ordinary trial is wrong. Impeachment is governed by a few clauses of The Constitution and rules adopted by House and Senate. In brief, the House votes to bring charges, the case is presented to the Senate, the Senate votes on removal.

To my knowledge, these are false:

  • There are limited, specific grounds for impeachment.
  • The President must be read his Miranda rights.
  • The President has a right to a speedy trial.
  • The President has a right to representation by counsel.
  • There is a right to an impartial jury.
  • There is a right to confront witnesses.
  • Minority members of Congress have right outside the rules to intervene in the process in House and Senate.
  • There is a penalty on conviction other than removal from office.

I have heard the claim that the President has a right to a “fair trial.” I know of no basis for this claim.

I have heard the claim that the President can’t be impeached for “abuse of power;” this and any similar claim is false.

I have heard the claim that if President Trump is removed, any future President can be removed on frivolous charges. The premise, that charges against Trump are frivolous, is false.


Posted in Trump | Tagged | 4 Comments

False arguments


  1. If Tom Reed was right to oppose intervention in Syria in 2013, no intervention is needed in 2019 under much different circumstances.
  2. If U.S. troops should not have been sent to Syria, their precipitous withdrawal by Trump is justified.
  3. President Trump doesn’t need advice because he knows more than any adviser.
  4. If a President were impeached and removed for any reason, that would be unfair to those who voted for that person in the last election.
  5. The House should not vote to impeach, unless the Senate is sure to convict.
  6. If Michael Cohen committed crimes, Donald Trump is innocent.
  7. If Nancy Pelosi is nuts, Donald Trump is sane.
  8. If the people elected Tom Reed, they must approve anything he does or might do.
  9. If we don’t like Democrats’ health care plans, we must vote for a Republican.
  10. Officials like former Secretary of Defense Mattis or former Secretary of State Tillerson, who fall out of favor with DJT, were never respectable.


Posted in Reed's Views, Trump | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

What is our ancestry?

What is our ancestry in NY-23?

Nationality Population
American 39,851
Arab 3,561
Czech 2,043
Danish 3,074
Dutch 18,993
English 86,367
French (except Basque) 17,677
French Canadian 4,870
German 129,791
Greek 1,990
Hungarian 3,614
Irish 101,424
Italian 67,474
Lithuanian 1,661
Norwegian 5,065
Polish 37,884
Portuguese 1,172
Russian 4,857
Scotch-Irish 5,615
Scottish 12,608
Slovak 1,976
Subsaharan African 1,938
Swedish 19,926
Swiss 3,111
Ukrainian 5,076
Welsh 8,375
West Indian (excluding Hispanic origin groups) 1,289

How many of us would be here today, if our ancestors had been required to have health insurance before they could immigrate?

Posted in Immigration, Trump | 1 Comment

What was the Republican brand?

brand“Morning Joe” claims DJT and his minions are “tarnishing the Republican brand.”

What was the Republican brand?

  • Good government
  • Fiscal conservative
  • Law and order
  • Free trade
  • Family values
  • Bipartisan foreign policy
  • Anti-Communism
  • Defend The Constitution
  • Protect the environment
  • Free enterprise
  • Local control of schools
  • States’ rights

What did I miss? What happened?

Posted in Political | Tagged , | 3 Comments

What it’s not about

Honesty     What it’s not about:

  • Whistle blower and other concerned officials.
  • Giuliani, whatever he might have done.
  • Jared or Ivanka, although they may have played a role.
  • Unnamed officials who may have acted to protect DJT from himself.
  • National Security, although it may have been compromised.
  • Any Quid pro quo or lack thereof.
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Nancy Pelosi
  • Joe or the late Hunter Biden
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
  • Extreme liberals or conservatives.
  • Smoking guns.
  • Crime.
  • Political fortunes of Democrats or Republicans.

While we may hear claims that it is about some of these things, what it’s about is honest government, respect for the Constitution, and DJT’s scandalous actions, known and yet to be known, which undermine it.



Posted in Trump | Tagged | 6 Comments

Tom Reed on Ukraine Scandal

loyaltyAn article by Rick Miller in the  “Olean Times Herald” reports Tom Reed’s views on the “Ukraine situation.” Miller reports:

  • Rep. Tom Reed took aim Thursday at “extreme-left” Democrats he said were eager to overthrow the election and impeach President Donald Trump.
  • Reed said extremists represented by the “AOC (Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) Squad” have taken over the Democratic Party in the House and are responsible for the push toward an impeachment inquiry.
  • The Corning Republican said he did “not see a smoking gun in the evidence that has been put forward.”
  • He said he read the transcript of the July 25 telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
  • Reed was asked whether it bothered him that Trump, according to the claims of his critics, appeared to be seeking re-election help from the Ukraine president with a Democratic opponent.“I did not see those words in the transcript,” Reed replied. Instead, Reed said he saw a request by Trump asking the Ukrainian president about corruption involving former Vice President Joe Biden when he was in public office.

Tom says he would follow the evidence, but the only evidence he sees is stories made up by Democrats. His view would be more plausible if he would admit that something untoward happened and find excuses for it. As it is, the evidence shows he is corrupt.

Note: The “transcript” was notes and recollections laundered by the Trump Administration. The transcript remains hidden in a top secret vault.


Posted in Reed's Views, Trump | Tagged , , | Leave a comment