Foreign Aid is Quid Pro Quo

There are many important truths lost in the furor over Ukrainian foreign aid and president Trump’s actions (side note: if anyone had told me a year ago that I would care about foreign aid to Ukraine, I’d tell him to take another drink).

One is that quid pro quo, by definition, is not something illegal. In fact, the entirety of foreign aid is quid pro quo. The US hands out foreign aid and expects the receiving country to do something or another. Put another way, what is the purpose of foreign aid? It is both carrot and stick, designed to pressure other nations to do things that benefit the US (and ideally, to benefit them as well). Before anyone gets excited, remember that other countries are not under any compulsion to accept US aid, nor should they be. They do know that strings are attached, because strings are always attached. Again, foreign aid is quid pro quo, and the president decides when and how the foreign aid is delivered, because the president determines foreign policy.

This is a basic understanding that is critical to this whole discussion, yet so many people opine on things that they do not understand. For what purpose, I often wonder. Just to hear themselves talk? What is the point in exposing your ignorance if all you ever get from it is a verbal or textual beatdown?

Second, is that quid pro quo is only illegal if it concerns doing something that impacts a political race. To believe that Trump is doing anything concerning Biden rests upon some serious illusions about the prospects of Biden and the nature of Trump. First, Trump is an egotist. He believes he is unstoppable. He has no concern about beating Biden. Really, anyone who has followed Biden, knows that he is a one-man wrecking crew, but all the damage he does is to himself. Need examples? Here are just a few. It’s simply not believable that Trump is shaking in his boots over Biden.

Third, Trump seems to keep grudges. Forgiveness is not his strong suit. Thus, his interests lie in finding out who did what do him, when, and how. Thus, his interest in Ukrainain corruption is not only general (based on the situation he inherited), but also specific. He knows that Hunter Biden, a known cocaine user, was peddling influence while working for Burisma, a Ukrainain company. He knows that Joe Biden got the Ukrainian prosecutor fired when he was getting too close to revealing the shady practices at Burisma. He also believes that Crowdstrike, a company (apparently) involved with the DNC’s 2016 election meddling, is based in the Ukraine. So, is it strange that Trump wants to find out, for personal reasons, how he was sabotaged in 2016? Not at all. I would expect that. Also, as the president, shouldn’t Trump be concerned about election meddling when the election is a presidential election? Yes. In fact, he is obligated to do so. Also, Joe Biden is incontrovertibly wrapped up in the Ukrainian corruption. He is a material witness, as they say.

Other things to consider here are Trump’s personal style (smoking out people deemed traitorous to him), the lackluster quality of evidence (discussing impressions of a transcript already released), the dishonest nature of many people involved, the not-by-the-book impeachment hearings, the weird whistleblower situation, and the timing (approaching the 2020 presidential elections).

Taken together, these important truths illustrate that the evidence points one way, and the desperate desire to torture the evidence will not make it confess something other than its nature. This situation is shaping up be Russiagate 2.0 — yet another game of political chicken that makes a mockery out of the principles that America and the federal system of government should embody.