Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Joel Pollak told Dennis Prager that Democrats’ impeachment push against President Donald Trump is harming the presidential campaigns of their senator candidates.
Pollak joined Prager on the latter’s eponymous radio show, observing how Sens. Amy Klobuchar’s (D-MN), Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT), and Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) required attendance at the impeachment trial of Trump in the Senate compromises their campaigning.
“I mentioned to you before, we have to see the humor in some of this, and I laughed thinking about Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and the others being forced to sit in the Senate until two in the morning, while their rivals — Joe Biden and Pete Butiggieg — get to run around Iowa talking to voters before the caucuses,” said Pollak. “So you have to see the humor in some of it.”
LISTEN:
Pollak added, “Spare a thought for the chief justice, John Roberts. He had to sit up [in the Senate] the entire time, and this morning, he’s at the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments before he goes back to the Senate, so he is actually doing two jobs around the clock.”
Democrats’ continued calls for additional “witnesses” in the Senate impeachment trial reveals the weakness of their allegations advanced in the House, assessed Pollak. “When you impeach the president, as Jerry Nadler said, that’s a statement of their belief that there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt [of Donald Trump’s guilt]. Well, if you proved your case beyond a reasonable doubt, you don’t need more witnesses.”
Pollak continued, “If they think they’ve won the game, they should just present the case and have the Senate vote on it, but, as the president’s lawyers said yesterday, the fact that Democrats keep insisting on more witnesses — and they don’t know what these witnesses are going to say, by the way — tells you they don’t actually think they’ve won. They haven’t proven their case, and it looks very weak.”
Prager asked about a rumored “trade” between Democrats and Republicans, with Democrats being permitted to call John Bolton to testify in exchange for a subpoena of Hunter Biden.
“That would be the most desperate trade of all time,” replied Pollak. “Hunter Biden would be called by Republicans to show that there was a legitimate public interest in President Trump asking the president of Ukraine to investigate all of this. Democrats have made one pillar of their argument that there was no possible public interest in asking Ukraine about the Bidens. They said [there was not even] a minor public interest. They said there was no public interest, at all. So once you bring Hunter Biden in and he has to explain why he was getting paid more than board members of Fortune 500 companies to sit on this Ukrainian gas company’s board when he had no experience, that’s going to start to look very bad, especially with all the other details coming out in Peter Schweizer’s book this week about other Biden family members who enriched themselves while Biden was vice president. So it’s a very bad witness for Democrats.”
Pollak continued, “[Republicans] would ask [Hunter Biden] how he came to be on this board. They would also ask him about the investment company he formed with the son-in-law of John Kerry and how he came to acquire something like $1.5 billion of funds that were controlled by the Chinese government that were somehow placed at his disposal for investment.”
“How did [Hunter Biden] sell his company with no business experience and having just been kicked out of the Navy?” asked Pollak. “How did he sell himself to foreign governments and large foreign companies? Did he talk about his father being vice president and how that would gain him access to the Obama administration,because that’s the only reasonable answer to that question. And also, his business partner was John Kerry’s son-in-law, the secretary of state. So, clearly that he was selling political access, and I think they’re going to ask him whether this was a bribe or not, was this his MO, was this his business model?”
Pollak concluded, “Because then it becomes immediately clear, not only did Donald Trump have a duty to investigate the corruption side of it, but he also had a duty to know if it was affecting the Obama administration’s policies on Ukraine, on China, [and] on other issues.”
Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.