Phooey! I had a more detailed response to you typed up and then lost it. I think there's a way to recover those that go astray. Do you or anyone else know how?
At any rate, the meat of it is this. When I said Trump is viewed as an interloper and not a commander-in-chief, I meant that this has been the default position from the election on and not unique to the Ukrainian saga. From the beginning, every comment, idea, goal, and subsequent policy has been treated with acrimony and suspicion by the Uniparty. Much of this has been media driven, including certain right-wing media, but much of it is natural. Trump is an iconoclast, and iconoclasts are always rejected by the majority of folk at the beginning. If their ideas prove successful, they often later become admired, even revered. History is replete with examples.
Like other Republican presidents before him, Trump also faces this potentially troublesome fact. Studies have discovered that around 97% of career govt. employees contribute to the Democrat party, if they contribute at all.
I get that leftist career employees in Ukraine were primed to dislike Trump's actions, but the original memo concerning the aid has surfaced. It succinctly states the hold is a temporary one. In addition, there's no evidence or claim that the money was urgently needed. All in all, it doesn't seem legitimate that two career employees would fall on their swords over such a miniscule change of events, esp. when the change was deemed 'temporary' from the outset. |
