Offered the opportunity to describe the best-case scenario in light of the impeachment of President Donald Trump, Bill Whittle outlines the worst-case scenario as the best we can hope. Is the situation for the country, the Congress and the Constitution that dire?
Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is a production of our Members. Join the rebellion today at https://BillWhittle.com/register/
Wanna get away? Bill, Scott, Stephen Green and many of our friends are going on a Caribbean cruise May 15-18, and you can come with us. Find out more and book your cabin now at
8 replies on “Trump Impeachment: The Worst-Case Scenario is the Best We Can Hope”
I think this whole thing was a case of: “nooo, don’t throw me in the briar patch!” Forget Biden for now: I think the witnesses the President’s team needs to call are Schiff and the “whistleblower.” Also a couple of people from the State Department to explain that withholding funds temporarily is standard procedure, required by law (i.e., by Congress). The case here isn’t to “prove” Trump’s innocence beyond merely pointing out the presumption of innocence and the requirement for the prosecution to prove its case (something all 100 senators understand). The case is to prove that the impeachment is a bad faith political maneuver.
I’m not sure if I buy 3D or 5D chess strategy on the part of the Trump Administration, but I do think there’s something to the notion, outlined below by Mr. Stowers, that they are using this as an opportunity to direct some sunlight onto the corruption so that Durham and Barr can drop the hammer afterwards. Trump knows how to use the press to turn them into their own worst enemy.
This is what you need, Scott. Take 1 minute at the end of every bwn episode to step out of character and speak for a moment on your real 2 cents on the matter. Maybe people wouldn’t be so confused.
I think there are two critical points that are missed in this particular episode.
First, the general public believes that a trial always includes witnesses. This is the general process for criminal trials in the US and is reinforced by crime TV. The fact that the impeachment process is different is lost on most.
Second, the presumption of innocence was thrown out with the OJ trial in the 90s. This was really the first time that the public was completely engage in the judicial process and acted as the couch jury. The media sensationalism around this and the general agreement of the public that OJ was guilty provided the basis that the judicial system is rigged.
I believe that the Democrats are counting on these two factors in their assessment of how to handle the impeachment process today.
God Bless Bill Whittle! I am so frustrated and have so much pent up emotion over what these evil scumbag Dems have done and are continuing to do. Bill spoke with great clarity, as usual, and has it exactly right–this is a moral outrage and should have been nipped in the bud. Is there one Republican who can see this for what it is? ONE who has the moral fiber to STAND UP and put an end to THIS TRAVESTY? Please God!!
I expect to see not one but several Republican senators make this argument when they debate whether to call witnesses. (I think I remember that there’s a floor debate about it, but maybe not.) At that point the question won’t be whether there is one, but whether there are 51.
I can’t make up my mind about this. I feel the pull of the rationales to acquit at the first opportunity, but I also think that allowing the Democrats enough rope to hang themselves is a valid strategy, and perhaps even the more politically savvy strategy. The political question is whether Cocaine Mitch (and the President) can time it to wrap up closely enough to the election that people will not have forgotten it, while not allowing it to get out of hand and backfire, morphing into voters being mad at Republicans for not ending it sooner. This kind of strategizing is seductive but dangerous.
Principle would be better. Not sure we’ll get it.
The best case scenario has nothing to do with impeachment, IMO, but with the exposure by DOJ of what high-ranking Democrats have been doing followed by criminal charges where appropriate for money-laundering and influence peddling. Hopefully, that will come from Giuliani and Durham after the impeachment fails.
And it will fail. Trump doesn’t have to prove his innocence as Democrats keep saying. Instead, his accusers must prove his guilt, and they have nothing with which to do that. The Democrats changed all the rules in the House to get an impeachment. They don’t get to make the rules in the Senate, and the Senate will acquit Trump for sheer lack of evidence.
I think this trial was wanted by Trump to expose just how low the Democrats have stooped and what lack of integrity they have. The trial will prove it beyond doubt. The impeachment is a farce, we all know it, and it is basically just bread and circuses for the great unwashed public. The Dems believe that if they get to constantly keeping talking they control the narrative. So, I am sure the impeachment will die a sudden death (and Dems will start a new impeachment because they have nothing else they can do. Everything they’ve tried to do to hurt Trump has failed, and they know Trump’s DOJ prosecutors are closing in on them, so they grow ever more desperate. Look, the impeachment is silly. Even if it worked, Trump would not be removed from office. Bill Clinton was impeached for perjury (an actual crime) and he was not removed from office, so the idea that Trump will be removed for not committing a crime is just silly.
But I do think there is a serious classified criminal investigation in progress regarding outright corruption among certain Democrats. We know that the sons of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry were all given cushy jobs that made them millions for no other reason than for some foreign source to buy their parents’ influence. Biden even bragged about it in public on tape, about doing a quid pro quo by withholding a billion in aid to Ukraine until they fired the corruption investigator looking into his son (the very thing they accuse Trump of doing–which he never did–as opposed to Biden, who actually did it).
We know that John Kerry has traveled to Iran many times to talk to the heads of state there (a violation of the Logan Act) trying to salvage some benefit from the horrible treaty Obama got us into that Trump destroyed. I think Durham and Giuliani are all over that. While I feel bad that the Democrats have made a face out of the House and the impeachment process, I rejoice in the fact that I think some heels are about to come down on some people hard.
I think the trial in the impeachment will set up and expose a lot of them, and then DOJ will be able to close the loop without any doubt. The trial is to wake up average Americans to the Democrat collusion. Trump has kept every promise he’s made, and his main promise was to drain the swamp. He has been doing much of this quietly, getting low level actors fired or forced to retire, but he needs strong evidence to put away senior people, and he is playing his cards close to make sure that DOJ has enough evidence that their intended targets have no chance of escaping justice this time. I think the Dems have a house of cards. The impeachment will go nowhere, only irritate many Americans. That works to Trump’s favor. Witnesses called will also work in Trump’s favor, even if they are hostile, because they have nothing but hearsay and assumption, no evidence. It’s what happens after the impeachment fails that I look forward to. Somebody is going to prison for crimes they’ve committed in office, and it won’t be Trump. Grab your popcorn.
Seems to me the Senate needs to call just one witness and that is Bill Whittle.
Bill, you identified the herd of elephants in congress that is beyond discussion. BOTH Republicans and Democrats desperately don’t want the elephants identified. Exactly because it would put an impassible wall against the aggrandizement of government power over We the People. It would specifically limit their ability to aggrandize their own power. The power to force people to do what they would not otherwise choose to do.
Government IS power over people and such power eventually corrupts everything and anything. Because of this, both sides are as corrupt or even more corrupt than any mafia boss. They need to be removed from the seats of power and the seats of power need to be burned to the ground. There are pitifully few who are not that corrupt. I doubt there are enough of them to make a critical difference.
You say we need better people in government. Yes, but before that can happen you have to have better ideas in We the People. That bus left the station too many decades ago. Almost all we have are bad ideas and even worse ideas with better ideas being identified as “simplistic”. Meaning they have been shown to work and they would work again if implemented.
See the recovery of the economy by implementation of a minuscule reduction in taxes and the oppressive mass of rules, regulation, and diktats over the economy as a case in point. With business as usual, it could NOT have happened. No magic button was pressed. It was simply removing the impediments that stops capitalism dead in its tracks. This has been known since Adam Smith spoke at the beginning of the industrial revolution.
Yet failure is the goal of the day. Which is used to justify implementation of still worse ideas that also fail. This leads to doubling down on even worse ideas which also fail. Rinse and repeat endlessly. This is the path of ALL governments since the first government. I don’t expect anything to change. Government IS the problem because the application of government power can only keep things from happening and cannot make things happen. It takes minds that are free to function and the liberty to act according to the free choices of those minds.
At this point, I cannot be optimistic about the Republic being revived in any meaningful way. We might limp along for a while but the edge of the abyss is approaching rapidly. My 83rd birthday is approaching and, if I am lucky, I wont live long enough to experience the final collapse.