There is a common thread in these three tweets:
The president solicited a foreign attack on our elections.— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) September 23, 2019
If the President asked or pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate his political rival, either directly or through his personal attorney, it would be troubling in the extreme. Critical for the facts to come out.— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) September 22, 2019
The president, per people close to him, is enjoying all this as it plays out. https://t.co/9QqkWGhyYt— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) September 22, 2019
"Solicited a foreign attack on our elections" and ""asked or pressured Ukraine's president to investigate his political rival" suggest (Romney) or assert (Shaub) that President Trump merely- as The Wall Street Journal has reported- requested that Ukraine investigate Hunter Biden; nothing more to see here.
Haberman's tweet implies the same because she claims that Trump's people like this story.
They would be pleased if they believe, as Shaub and Romney appear to, that the affair begins and ends with the President trying to get a foreign country to dig up some dirt on the leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination. Clearly, in 2016 Trump solicited help from a foreign country- one of the nation's two major geopolitical rivals, no less- to investigate his electoral rival and the American people shrugged their shoulders and voted race.
This time it is Ukraine, and they're not even anywhere near as great a threat to the "homeland" as is Putin's Russia.
So of course the President's people, who are very unlikely to have been told the whole story by Trump, are gleeful while Shaub and Romney recognize that welcoming foreign influence in American elections is reprehensible. However, they're probably missing a major part of the story. Pursuant to this procedure
The employee submits the complaint to the inspector general of the intelligence community. The inspector general is required to review it within 14 days and then determines whether the complaint is of “urgent concern,” which is defined as involving conduct “relating to” the “administration or operation of an intelligence activity within the authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information.
The whistleblower obviously knew this. But in what universe is a report that the President of the USA urged- unsuccessfully, as far as we know- government officials in Ukraine to open an investigation into Joe Biden an urgent matter?
It is not. The whistleblower jeopardizes his/her career by filing a report with the Inspector General, especially in this Administration, in which each cabinet member is expected to protect the President from all critics. Yet, the individual filed a complaint which he or she very likely thought was "urgent."
Democrats and Democrats alike (redundancy intentional) fume because President Trump will do anything, perhaps short of murder, to ensure his re-election.has no loyalty to the USA. But we knew this before. We do not know, however, why urgency is claimed for what thus far appears to be a simple narcissistic and unpatriotic act committed by a megalomaniac.
There is more to this than is commonly assumed.