House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) fell asleep during his own impeachment hearing this week. Seems like there’s a metaphor for something in that. If you thought that the goat rodeo posing as an impeachment couldn’t possibly get any more boring, you might want to make sure that you’re not operating any heavy machinery right now.
Intel Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) botched his chance to build any sort of case for impeachment. After several weeks of secret basement inquisition hearings, followed by two weeks of cherry-picked witnesses for public hearings, Adam Schiff managed to accomplish two things.
First, he caused support for impeachment among likely American voters to plummet. Next, he caused President Trump’s popularity with the American people to go up even further.
So, to try to salvage the debacle, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) decided to turn the impeachment proceedings back over to Jerrold Nadler. You know, the guy who managed to botch the rollout of the Mueller Dossier! I’m starting to think that when Democrats send their people to Congress, they’re not sending their best.
Nadler’s first big shot in the limelight since the Mueller humiliation was to be a sober affair. He decided to hold a hearing that featured seasoned legal scholars, to explain to all of us stupid Americans how it’s suddenly okay to use a new definition of “bribery” to impeach President Donald Trump.
The Democrats called three law professors, and Republicans were allowed to call one witness of their own. The result was that the Democrats’ professor witnesses were all proud, known Hillary Clinton donors. The Republicans’ attorney witness was also a Democrat – and one who had voted for Hillary. This situation was not looking good for President Trump!
If you’ve watched or read any previous hearings similar to this one, you probably had an expectation of how the hearing would go. First, the witnesses would explain the intricacies of the law itself. They would talk about the Constitution, the intention of the Founding Fathers when they wrote the statutes, how the Supreme Court has historically viewed and rules on the statutes, and then finally explain how Trump’s actions clearly violated whatever laws they were talking about.
That is exactly how the legal arguments from scholars went during the impeachment of Bill Clinton, the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, and the impeachment investigation into Richard Nixon (who was never impeached). That is the norm – the standard – of how impeachment hearings with legal scholars have always been held in the past. But because that pesky Donald Trump is just so bloody awful, we have to throw out the rule of law, standards, norms, and traditions, just to get rid of the guy!
All three of the Democrats’ legal scholar witnesses upended the standard for how you build a legal case against a suspect. Instead of following the Law – Analysis – Interpretation – Current Accusation model, they turned the process upside down. They proclaimed President Trump guilty of impeachable crimes from the outset, and then cherry-picked historical precedents that fit their conclusions.
There wasn’t much from the Democrats’ witnesses in terms of actual laws that Trump broke, or analysis of how the Supreme Court has ever ruled on those imaginary crimes. Instead of serious legal scholars explaining complex matters of the law, we got three members of the #Resistance screeching about how Putin stole the election for Trump.
The worst moment – for the Democrats – came when Professor Pamela Karlan attacked Barron Trump, the young teenage son of Donald and Melania, who happens to be a child who has nothing to do with the impeachment goat rodeo.
Pamela Karlan, by the way, is a militant lesbian feminist who donated thousands of dollars to Hillary Clinton and is rumored to have been Hillary’s #1 choice for a Supreme Court nominee (if only Putin hadn’t stole the election).
Karlan screeched to the committee, “So while Donald Trump can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron!”
Chortle! Get it?! “Barron” and “baron” are homophones – two words that sound the same but are spelled differently!
Democrats in the chamber actually laughed out loud when that pig with a law degree took cheap shots at Barron Trump. So, I guess that whole “children of politicians are off-limits” thing that the Democrats are always harping about is different for the Trump family as well.
After learning about Karlan’s attack on her son the First Lady tweeted, “A minor child deserves privacy and should be kept out of politics. Pamela Karlan, you should be ashamed of your very angry and obviously biased public pandering, and using a child to do it.”
Karlan was later forced to apologize for using Baron Trump to score cheap political points. “I want to apologize for what I said earlier about the president’s son. It was wrong of me to do that. I wish the president would apologize, obviously, for the things he’s done that’s wrong, but I do regret having said that.”
So, what do you think? Did the Democrats moved the needle on impeachment with that hearing?