President Biden is clearly not in charge. Handlers guide him through each day; he has cheat notes for unscripted interviews and press conferences; he often blurts out the quiet part about doing what “they” told him to do or not to do; he often speaks incoherently, and often wanders off into nowhere. The 25th amendment allows a president to be removed (not impeached) temporarily or permanently if “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”. This amendment was raised continually while Trump was president, but is more applicable to Biden who is in the early stages of dementia. Unelected individuals, Chief of Staff Ron Klain, Policy Advisor Susan Rice, First Lady Jill Biden, former President Obama, are likely among some sort of cabal leading the nation. Biden himself even said, jokingly perhaps: “I’ve seen more of Dr. Fauci than I have my wife. We kid each other. But — hey look, who’s president? Fauci.”
But why stop at the 25th amendment? Why shouldn’t the president be impeached over his actions in Afghanistan which greatly harmed the United States, and led in part to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine what-is-really-happening-in-Ukraine? Why not for the unwillingness to address border problems (drugs, human trafficking, crimes committed against our citizens, etc.)? Why not for the corruption with his son and the ill-gotten funds funneled to Biden and his family, along with blatant suppression of information and interference in investigations?
Our COVID policy has been equally horrific. Earlier this month, NFL superstar, JJ Watt, became the latest in a long line of young healthy athletes to have unexplained heart conditions; some have even died https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20221003/nfls-jj-watt-says-heart-shocked-back-into-rhythm. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported 1 in 500 children are hospitalized within days of receiving a COVID vaccine. JAMA-study-reports-one-in-every-500-small-children-with-pfizer-jab-are-hospitalized. Are these minor injuries? Excess deaths have spiked the last two year, and COVID does not account for the whole story (https://ussanews.com/2022/10/10/pandemic-not-over-excess-deaths-tell-true-story/). Why doesn’t the Biden Administration ask more questions regarding empirical data on vaccine safety and excess deaths?
Last week, a Pfizer executive testifying to the European Parliament admitted the company did not test their vaccine’s impact on COVID transmission, saying they didn’t have time; they needed to “move at the speed of science” (https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-vaccine-pfizer-transmission-test/). This is not what we were told in 2021. This is not what our government told us either. Yet, again this week, President Biden encourages all Americans to be boosted because “it will protect you and protect others.” Why is he still spouting this discredited argument? The new vaccines are better than the ones that didn’t work well previously, the ones that children NEVER needed, the ones blamed for the rise in excess deaths around the world, the ones several countries no longer administer to younger demographics? The lies are being revealed, the truth is being uncovered, yet President Biden still echoes the exact same disproven messages from 2021.
More than a year ago, the CDC admitted vaccines no longer stop transmission: https://www.stardem.com/news/national/cdc-covid-vaccines-won-t-stop-transmission-fully-vaccinated-can-still-get-spread-delta-strain/article_5f83d0cb-8b0a-535d-bbad-3f571754e5ae.html. Yet, one month after this admission, vaccine mandates were instituted by the Biden administration. We are supposed to believe the latest vaccine will protect us after the last one had such limited beneficial impact?
The Intractable Problem: Oil
The president’s disastrous energy policy has led to desperation as the ever-so-obvious consequences come home to roost, and now into impeachable territory as I demonstrate below.
President Biden has attempted to debunk (supposed) myths Democrats are not actively discouraging and dis-incentivizing oil production; Biden tells us oil production has actually increased during his time in office.
Let me — let’s debunk some myths here. My administration has not stopped or slowed U.S. oil production; quite the opposite. We’re producing 12 million barrels of oil per day. And by the end of this year, we will be producing 1 million barrels a day, more than the day in which I took office. In fact, we’re on track for record oil production in 2023.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics. Admittedly, the US produces more oil today than in January 2021 when Biden took office. However, the US is well below the pre-pandemic March 2020 level (more than 1 million barrels per day below, in fact). Two-and-a-half years after the COVID induced economic shutdown, US oil production is still well below the point we should have recovered to.
After COVID lockdowns, the economy stalled, and oil production along with it. Yet, by the third quarter of 2020, the US experienced its largest GDP increase in history (35.3%). As Biden entered office January 2021, the distribution of COVID vaccines was also ramping up. It was rosy scenario which Biden has turned into crap. Throughout 2021, the economy recovered from the COVID stall. Why didn’t oil production return to pre-pandemic levels? Can we blame Putin for this?
This year, the president has significantly drained the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) bringing it to its lowest level since 1984. For months, the U.S. has released a million barrels a day from the SPR while U.S. oil producers produce one million barrels per day less than two-and-a-half years ago. Could this shortfall have been relieved in another way? Why drain our vital national reserves in the first place?
The Biden administration has not stopped or slowed U.S. oil production? It is quite the opposite? Why then drain our strategic reserves to make up the shortfall? Does it have anything to do with keeping the gas price down just prior to an election?
A few days ago, Bloomberg News reported the U.S. has just 25 days worth of diesel fuel supply remaining. Without diesel our trains and trucks don’t deliver the food and supplies we rely on.
Our European allies feel the pinch even more than us. The Russians are effectively using oil as leverage for their imperial adventures in Ukraine, cutting exports to highly dependent and pro-Ukrainian Europe along with finding new large markets in India and China. The Russians have not felt the pinch from sanctions because the US lacks the oil resources needed to exert real pressure; the Ukraine war grinds on needlessly. The president who has supposedly encouraged oil production was forced to beg Saudi Arabia to fill the gap. This past May, he eased sanctions on Venezuela in an effort to obtain more of their oil. We clearly still need oil; we still use it at the same clip as ever. Why is foreign oil, often from hostile countries, better than our own? What has this transfer of power and loss of leverage accomplished?
Two-and-a-half years ago gas prices were significantly lower and America was the world’s leading oil producer. Why the slow meander upward in oil production the last two years?
Biden says today he is promoting oil production, but what did he say two years when running for president?
Oil should not be an intractable problem. President Trump created a favorable environment for oil companies: cut government regulations, cut taxes, and re-opened pipelines; the private sector did the rest. President Biden, on the other hand, has created an unfavorable environment: cut oil leases, shut down pipelines, dramatically increased regulations, and then claimed he wasn’t doing any of it. The private sector responded and then Biden blamed them for problems.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-administration-severely-cuts-back-on-oil-and-gas-leases
“Number one, no more subsidies for fossil fuel industry, no more drilling on federal lands, no more drilling including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill period,” Biden said in a 2020 Democratic presidential debate.
He has certainly followed through on ill-conceived campaign promises:
Leasing is down 97% from the first 19 months of former President Donald Trump’s time in office.
.. . . the numbers don’t lie. The Interior Department has given out 203 leases for oil and gas in President Biden’s first 19 months. Trump and Obama each greenlit 10 times as many during the same time span. All of this could mean even higher fuel costs and more reliance on foreign sources of oil in the future.
President Biden is not adjusting to changing circumstances nor connecting his policy with bad results. Voters will punish his party in November, but still policy will not change. This is an intractable problem because killing fossil fuels is a Democrat commitment, not a negotiating point.
While speaking in Syracuse, New York, Biden said, “Today, the most common price of gas in America is $3.39, down from over $5 when I took office.”
Quid Pro Quo
This recap of recent history brings us to Biden’s Saudi Arabia trip and his latest impeachable offense. Despite releasing oil from our strategic reserves, prices remain high. OPEC+ said this summer they would cut oil production in October, thus putting even more upward pressure on prices. OPEC+ countries are pursuing their own interests; they limit supply to keep prices high. Why did we allow them so much leverage over us?
During his visit, Biden didn’t ask the Saudis to stop the production cut. He didn’t seek to help our European allies who are strapped for energy as winter approaches; he didn’t seek to stop the negative impact to US consumers; he didn’t seek to negate Russian tactics in Ukraine (Russian oil cuts to Europe and Ukraine will have a dramatic impact on the war this winter and bring about an end probably not so much to our liking). Instead, Biden simply asked the Saudis to delay the oil production cut one month–after the US election. As Hannibal Lecter famously said to Agent Starling: “quid pro quo”. Do something for me and I’ll do something for you.
We might have never known about this quid pro quo if not for the Saudi government itself:
“The Government of the Kingdom clarified through its continuous consultation with the U.S. Administration that all economic analyses indicate that postponing the OPEC+ decision for a month, according to what has been suggested, would have had negative economic consequences.”
Note this revelation came directly from the source, not some unknown whistle blower. NBC News reported the story this way:
Saudi Arabia has suggested the U.S. asked it to wait a month before it cut oil production, defending a move the White House has heavily criticized as helping Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Some Democrats suggested the U.S. re-evaluate its entire relationship with the kingdom, with Biden vowing “consequences” for a decision many viewed as a boon to Putin.
Saudi Arabia hit back Thursday, releasing a long, pointed statement in which it rejected suggestions the cut was “politically motivated,” saying the decision was reached by consensus and made to “protect the global economy from oil-market volatility.”
This is an obvious quid pro quo. You help us through this election and we will be grateful. We know the price of gas will be going up AFTER the election, but that’s a better scenario for Democrats. Is this the way US policy should work? Democrat political interests should not be placed ahead of national interests.
On top of that quid pro quo, Biden promises consequences for the Saudis not playing along, for not supporting Democrat Party interests.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/12/biden-threatens-consequences-for-saudi-arabia-after-opec-cut.html
President Joe Biden is angry at Saudi Arabia for its decision to slash oil production along with its OPEC allies against U.S. wishes, and he’s made no secret of it.
With the global economy on a knife-edge and energy prices high, Washington sees the kingdom’s move – which it made in coordination with Russia and other oil-producing states – as a snub and a blatant display of siding with Moscow.
So, it is more than quid pro quo. Because the Saudis didn’t play along, because they didn’t support Democrat Party interests and Biden’s scheme to delay impact until mid-November, they will be punished.
Yes, the Saudis sided with the Russians here. India, another strong and natural US ally, also sided with the Russians by purchasing oil from them. However, the question we should ask is: why are they siding with the Russians? Biden is negotiating with the Saudi’s biggest enemy, the Iranians. The Saudis are alarmed by a re-institution of a US-Iran nuclear deal. They were moving towards more cooperation with the US and Israel during the prior administration, but Biden is pushing them away. Similarly, India seeks oil for their burgeoning economy; Russia needs new consumers and the US cannot fill India’s needs, so where else should they go? President Biden’s policies again put us in this bad position. We can blame him as much as the Saudis for this problem.
To counter OPEC’s rebuff, Biden pulled an additional 15 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum reserve three weeks before the election. He denies he is using government resources to influence an election. He denies putting Democrat Party interests above all others. I don’t believe him.
Quid Pro Quo Redux
Why do I stress the “quid pro quo”? Because it is the very thing Trump was impeached for in 2019.
- In 2019, Trump spoke with the Ukrainian president and was accused of a quid pro quo to help his 2020 election bid. In 2022, Biden spoke with the Saudi leader and is accused of a quid pro quo to help the 2022 mid-term election.
- In 2019, Trump was accused of threatening consequences for not playing along (even though the Ukraine president stated he did not take Trump’s words as a threat). In 2022, Biden threatened consequences for the Saudis for not playing along.
- In 2019, a whistleblower inside the Trump administration, someone listening during the call, made the accusation. In 2022, the party affected, the Saudi government, made the accusation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_impeachment_of_Donald_Trump
Trump’s impeachment came after a formal House inquiry found that he had solicited foreign interference in the 2020 U.S. presidential election to help his re-election bid, and then obstructed the inquiry itself by telling his administration officials to ignore subpoenas for documents and testimony. The inquiry reported that Trump withheld military aid[a] and an invitation to the White House to Ukrainian presidentVolodymyr Zelenskyy in order to influence Ukraine to announce an investigation into Trump’s political opponent Joe Biden and to promote a discredited conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, was behind interference in the 2016 presidential election. A phone call between Trump and Zelenskyy on July 25, 2019, was particularly important—whistleblower Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was a participant in the call, and later informed Congress.[4]
Why shouldn’t Biden be impeached for this 2019 precedent? Maybe you think quid pro quo is not a legitimate basis for impeachment, but the playing field must be level. As Mark Levin said:
The next Democrat president must be impeached. Republicans cannot live under one Constitution while the other lives under another version of the Constitution.
Democrats sought to impeach Trump before he even entered office. The Obama administration spied on the Trump 2016 campaign, per an Inspector General report.
In November 2016, immediately after Trump was elected and before he took office, Mark Levin, conservative radio host, warned he would be impeached.
Vanity Fair, a decidedly non-conservative publication, said the following one week after the election:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/will-trump-be-impeached
Do a LexisNexis search, and you’ll find that “Trump” and some variant of “impeach” have already appeared in 37 newspaper headlines. (Duplicates are at play, yes, but let’s not get in the way of a striking statistic.) Documentarian Michael Moore has vowed to look for the first impeachment opportunity and do what he can to help spur it along. Law professor Christopher Lewis Peterson of the University of Utah has written a paper arguing that Donald Trump can technically be impeached immediately, provided that Trump University is judged to be as fraudulent as it looks. Allan Lichtman, the American University professor who predicted Trump’s win, also predicted Trump would be impeached. Clearly, no one’s wasting time on this. So what are we to make of it?
Mind you, this was ONE WEEK after the 2016 election.
Texas representative Al Green tried three times to impeach Trump during the early days of his administration:
https://www.texastribune.org/2019/12/10/al-green-pushed-impeachment-years-ago-hurting-democrats-now/
His quote has been printed in big black and white letters on a poster board set up by the Republican staff on the Intelligence and Judiciary committees: “I’m concerned if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected.”
Green said that in a July interview with NBC News after he was asked for his thoughts on the President Donald Trump’s unwillingness to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin over that country’s meddling in the 2016 elections.
The Mueller report was a formal inquiry into Trump/Russia collusion, a Democrat version of “election denial”. It took two years to produce and was ignored due to disappointing results, but not for a lack of trying:
in the course of his 22-month probe, Mueller “employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.
The last twelve months of the Trump administration brought two impeachments, one just days before he was to leave office.
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/09/8472438/president-trump-impeachment-history
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqVmwITucAA (Mark Levin on impeachment quid pro quo)
Given all this, why shouldn’t Biden be impeached? His problems are as much or more serious than the ones Trump was investigated or impeached for.
Seek the Truth 
One thought on “Quid Pro Quo: Trump Impeached for it. Why not Biden?”