If Trump froze aid to Ukraine because its government did not investigate Trump’s political opponent, this would, in my view, constitute serious malfeasance. Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has approved U.S. aid to Ukraine in order to help that country resist Russian aggression. Freezing this aid because the Ukrainian government wouldn’t go after a Trump domestic opponent would be truly scandalous.
He then suggests that the timing of the release of aid create a presumption that must be overcome by Trump--the presumption being that pressuring Ukraine in this way raises a "good faith suspicion" of a quid pro quo which is illegal:
The administration unfroze aid to Ukraine last week. Is the delay in the release of the aid long and unprecedented enough to raise a good faith suspicion that a quid-pro-quo was at work? If so, Were there legitimate reasons — reasons unrelated to advancing Trump’s political interests — that overcome the suspicion and reasonably explain the delay?
Here's the problem I see with this argument. Mirengoff keeps talking about the possibility that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to "investigate Biden." I can think of no reason why Mirengoff would think this is what was going on. Ukraine knows exactly what happened--Biden is on record telling the world that he spoke directly to Ukraine's leaders, demanding that they fire a certain prosecutor. Ukraine has no need to investigate. They can deal with the matter any way they see fit. Something else, I think, is going on.
