As this whole whistleblower debacle has shown, there are a lot of butthurt holdovers from the Obama administration who disagree with President Trump’s foreign policy and mistakenly think that they set the policy, since they’re the experts after all. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman seemed to still be bothered that “he was given conflicting reasons for why he was not included on a trip to Ukraine” and felt he “wasn’t having access to all the information and not attending the things that I would typically be participating in.”
And now it seems that Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan also is troubled by the Trump administration’s foreign policy. Listen as she argues that it’s in our best interest for Ukraine to fight the Russians there so we don’t have to fight them here.
Like Dr Hill in round 1, pink hat Karlan rants: We must arm Ukraine to defend Ukraine
Translation: Trump’s foreign policy cannot be abided. We know best. There’s only one solution: He must be impeached.
??In summary: Impeachment for policy differences.pic.twitter.com/MsokgxU5BE
— Tosca Austen (@ToscaAusten) December 4, 2019
Reminder: the president alone sets foreign policy.
And if we’re reading this correctly, Karlan is upset because President Trump withheld (very briefly) aid to Ukraine (bribery?), and that theoretically could lead to the Russians coming here to fight us next. She should be happy, though; while the Obama administration promised aid and sent blankets and MREs to Ukraine, Trump reversed that policy and approved lethal aid in the form of Javelin missiles.
“In summary: Impeachment for policy differences” nails it. If the orange man did it, her stance must be the opposite, even if it means physically crossing the road to avoid a Trump property.
America can see right through this angry expert Karlan, irrespective of her legal pedigree. Short of foam coming out of her lips. this isn’t a testimony, it’s activism live on a nationally televised stage.
— Tosca Austen (@ToscaAusten) December 4, 2019
Who’s interests did the coup in Kyiv serve? The U.S. or the DNC?
In the eyes of the neoliberals, the DNC is not just a political party, not just a party cyclically in and out of power. Their allegiance is to the DNC above and apart from the United States, this has become clear.— Dan Mellis (@MtgGuyDan) December 4, 2019
This is really going to help their impeachment cause. She is proving that this is all about disagreeing with the President, nothing more. No grounds for impeachment.
— Ted Andrews (@TMA62) December 4, 2019
— Liberty Never Sleeps (@realLibertyTom) December 4, 2019
That was always the plan you know
— Ron Bassilian (R) (@Ron4California) December 4, 2019
She and all of her family members should be involuntarily drafted immediately to go fight the good fight. ?
— RussiaAteMyHomework (@CatyKean) December 4, 2019
The Army must be comprised of Harvard Law professors and students.
— Not a fan of spirit cookers (@treesaree) December 4, 2019
So on top of being a "constitutional expert" she is also a "foreign policy expert"
— Eric Lopez (@ericplopez) December 4, 2019
Republicans don't need to ask any questions today. Just use their time to let these leftist loonies keep talking. If given enough time to continue to babble, they'll do a better job of debunking their own testimony.
— They'll come 4U2 (@mike_pish) December 4, 2019
This is election meddling and they are so tone deaf. This is an abuse of power by her party. To suggest they would be objective is laughable. They came in with only one agenda & have put on the show of their lifetime. Did they get a check too or just pimped?
— TaraC (@taracovington) December 4, 2019
Someone needs to perhaps let this lady know the cold war ended some time ago so they can knock off the whole Marcia Brady "Russia Russia Russia" nonsense… if anything they are the ones causing the animosity.
— Roger C (@floplag) December 4, 2019
I don’t remember voting for her. I also don’t remember her speaking out against Obama not providing military aid to the Ukraine.
— V Perry (@V4vendetta14) December 4, 2019
is she aware that Obama refused to arm Ukraine for 8 years as a favor to Vladimir Putin?
— Butch Casa (@ButchCasa) December 4, 2019
Trump was the one that actually armed the Ukrainians. Obama sent them blankets.
— Jason Motes ♿️?? (@JasonMotes9) December 4, 2019
It’s funny to me that president Trump has a foreign policy that has been supplying arms and support to Ukraine in line with what she is saying. President Obama did not do that. The funny part is she avidly hates Trump and loves Obama.
— Pete LaValle (@LaVallePeter) December 4, 2019
The other thing that’s funny is for a ‘Constitutional expert’ she seems to not understand our assignment with criminal investigations treaty we have had with Ukraine for 20 years which makes it our place to ask them.
— Pete LaValle (@LaVallePeter) December 4, 2019
Interesting that she didn't feel this way during the Obama administration. Why didn't she scream then?
— cnevarez (@cnevarez) December 4, 2019
In other words, confirming this is less about verifying whether specific crimes actually happened, and more about "if *my allies* were in power we would do it a different way" and making it so through means other than the ballot box.
— A Dad in Missouri (@n4dad) December 4, 2019
It speaks volumes that of all the "constitutional scholars" in this country, Nadler chose an angry, nasty, partisan hack with an advanced case of TDS.
This is a preview of who this country will turn to if the left ever gets total power. We cannot let that happen.
— John Gacinski (@johngacinski) December 4, 2019
Related:
Noah Feldman says if we can’t impeach Trump, ‘we live in a monarchy’ and no longer a democracy https://t.co/rN5RapDEKr
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) December 4, 2019
