Yesterday, there was yet another “smoking gun” in the Trump-Ukraine story—at least that is what the media would have you believe.

Time and time again, they have reported so-called “bombshell” details about supposed illegal activities undertaken by President Trump and his associates.

Remember the Russia investigation?

Outlets like The New York Times won Pulitzer prizes for printing false stories about the alleged “Russian Collusion” in the 2016 election; the Muller Report found that there was no collusion between Russia and anyone in Trump’s orbit.

However, the media didn’t admit they were wrong and moved onto the next story that they hope will cause Trump to be removed from office: the Ukraine-Biden investigation story, otherwise known as Ukrainegate.

Unless you have been living under a rock, you are well aware of the details of the story. The Democrats have opened an unofficial impeachment inquiry into President Trump for allegedly withholding military funding to the Ukrainian government contingent on the Ukrainians investigating Joe and Hunter Biden.

The Democrats have conducted the process behind closed doors and haven’t taken a vote on the House floor on rules and procedures for how the inquiry is to be conducted.

They are keeping Republicans out of secret depositions with witnesses; the Democrats are requiring another Democrat or one of their staff members to be in the room when they read the transcript of the closed-door hearing.

The Dems are hijacking the House of Representatives.

The latest occurrence of this happened yesterday when the United States Ambassador to Ukraine, William B. Taylor, testified before a committee of Democrats about his knowledge of the Ukraine affair.

The media immediately declared that his testimony provided the smoking gun that would bring about the end of President Trump.

However, they either didn’t read the 15- page opening statement made by Taylor or they didn’t read it thoroughly. If they did read it objectively, they would see that none of what Taylor said was based on first-hand knowledge of the supposed corruption. The information was gleaned from second and even third-hand sources.

You can’t impeach a president on hearsay. However, that is what the Democrats intend on doing.

The New York Times inaccurately stated that “the chain of events that Mr. Taylor laid out in his testimony suggested a clear quid pro quo between the $391 million in suspended assistance and Mr. Trump’s demands that Ukraine investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. as well as a debunked conspiracy theory involving Ukrainian help for Democrats in the 2016 election.”

That is a false statement: There is no “clear” evidence that there was a quid pro quo and Taylor’s testimony doesn’t present any first-hand evidence that such a quid pro quo occurred.

Unlike many of the people spewing inaccurate information about Taylor’s statement, I actually read all 15-pages of his testimony. I will quote from the relevant portions of the testimony and give my analysis below.

Early in his testimony Taylor said that “Ukraine was being fundamentally undermined by an irregular, informal channel of U.S. policy-making and by the withholding of vital security assistance for domestic political reasons.”

That sums up the central claim made by Taylor: the Trump administration used taxpayer money as a carrot to dig up dirt on a domestic political opponent.

Taylor said he was not listening in on the now-infamous phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky. He instead claims he was told about the call from a top official on the National Security Council, Tim Morrison.

He learned it second-hand. As he stated, “The first summary I heard from anybody inside the U.S. government was during a phone call I had with Tim Morrison, Dr. Hill’s recent replacement at the NSC, on July 28. Mr. Morrison told me that President Trump had suggested that President Zelenskyy or his staff meet with Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General Barr.”

Throughout the testimony, Taylor stated that the quid pro quo was contingent on a meeting between Trump and Zelensky and then proceeded to claim that he had knowledge that the military funding was attached to a Biden investigation.

He said, “During this same phone call I had with Mr. Morrison, he went on to describe a conversation Ambassador Sondland had with Mr. Yermak at Warsaw. Ambassador Sondland told Mr. Yermak at Warsaw. Ambassador Sondland told Mr. Yermak that the security assistance money would not come until President Zelenskyy committed to pursuing the Burisma investigation. I was alarmed by what Mr. Morrison told me about the Sondland-Yermak conversation.

This was the first time I had heard that the security assistance—not just the White House meeting— was conditioned on the investigations.”

There were multiple other instances of Taylor relaying second-hand knowledge of the events, but at no time did he provide first -hand knowledge of events that would be damning for President Trump.

At one point, he even admitted to hearing that Trump made it clear that there was no quid pro quo.

He said that Ambassador Sondland told him that Trump told him the “President has been crystal clear no quid pro quos of any kind.”

Taylor admitted that the Ukrainians were not aware of military assistance being withheld until August 29th. How can there be a quid pro quo without them knowing that they were expected to do something for the money?

The Trump-Zelensky phone call happened on July 25th, a full month before the Ukrainians learned that military assistance was being withheld.

The military aid was eventually released on September 11th.

Like the whistleblower complaint, Taylor was unable to document first- hand knowledge of the events that supposedly transpired.

That doesn’t matter to the Democrats and their media allies, they will continue to push forward with impeachment.

Facts don’t matter anymore, apparently.