President Trump has been watching support for impeachment drop like a stone in the polls, and his own popularity jump back up to 50% with the electorate. Emboldened by the support, Trump is now telling Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats: “Please impeach me!”
This is not reverse psychology on President Trump’s part, even though reverse psychology has worked very well against the Democrats for the past two-plus years. Trump really does want Pelosi to impeach him – because he is now holding all the cards.
Imagine how different a Senate impeachment trial would be compared to the Schiff Show that we all just spent two weeks watching. Trump’s own lawyers get to be in the room the whole time and ask questions. Republicans can finally call witnesses related to Ukraine – or anything else – to fill up the airwaves with Trump’s side of the story. That would be incredible.
First up on the witness list would be Adam Schiff, of course. What did he know and when did he know it? What’s his relationship to the so-called ‘whistleblower?’ Why did Schiff hire one of the whistleblower’s co-workers back in February, and another immediately after Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukraine president? How long was this scheme in the works?
Did Adam Schiff – as Chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee – ask the ICIG to change the rules for whistleblowers, so that a hearsay complaint could be used to spark an impeachment proceeding against a sitting president? Remember: The whistleblower complaint itself would never have been filed in the first place if the existing July 25 rules were in place. “I heard from a friend whose sister’s boyfriend’s cousin in Niagara Falls said…” was not a basis for “evidence” prior to the sudden rule change in August. Was that Adam Schiff’s doing?
Did Adam Schiff or his staff help to write the whistleblower’s complaint? That complaint reads like a document assembled by a team of lawyers. There’s no way that the CIA Pajama Boy Whose Name Must Not Be Spoken wrote that complaint on his own.
Next witness: Joe Biden. Did Joe Biden successfully protect Ukrainian gas company Burisma from an investigation, by having the lead prosecutor fired? When Joe Biden bragged to Council on Foreign Relations, “Well, son of a b—-! He got fired!” after demanding that the Ukrainian prosecutor be fired, in exchange a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine, was that story true? Does that not fit the very definition of extortion, Mr. Biden?
When Joe Biden flew his son to Communist China on Air Force Two, and his son secured a billion-dollar deal with the Chinese, did Joe know what was going on? Did that billion-dollar deal somehow never come up on the flight there or the flight home? Really, Joe?
Next witness: Chelsea Biden. Whoops! I did it again! I’m always getting the unimpressive children of elites who make millions of dollars a year through fake no-show jobs on the corporate boards of Democrat Party donor organizations mixed up. I meant to say Hunter Biden.
Describe for the Senate, if you would please, Hunter Biden: What’s a typical work day like at Burisma? Exactly what tasks did you perform, day in and day out, that justified your $50,000 a month job? Inquiring minds want to know.
Bonus points for any Republican Senator who asks a question about Puma St. Angel, or the crack pipe that was left in the passenger seat of Hunter’s rental car when it was returned in Arizona a couple of nights before the 2016 election.
If I were on Trump’s legal team, I would also drag every low-level Deep State bureaucrat who had a hand in the Russian Collusion Coup or the sequel, RC2: Ukrainian Boogaloo and treat them with all the dignity, fairness and respect that Roger Stone, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Donald Trump Jr. and the rest of the gang were treated with. Make every single one of those pitiful little federal employees lawyer up (out of their own pockets) and sit on the hot seat for a full day while Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Josh Hawley pepper them with incriminating questions. Enjoy the sunlight, roaches!
That would be so much fun to watch. Pelosi has to know that she has no good options left on the table. She’s lost. Trump has three Aces showing and he breaks into a cheesy grin every time he looks at his remaining cards. The Democrats lost. The coup plotters have lost – bigly.
What happens if Pelosi holds an impeachment vote, knowing full well that the American people didn’t fall for any of Adam Schiff’s childishly transparent attempts to paint President Trump as a criminal?
Theoretically, the vote could pass. But then we get the exact Senate trial outlined above, and which President Trump is taunting her to give him. Trump will emerge from the trial looking better than ever before, with his enemies painted as the scurrilous treason weasels that they really are.
If I were Mitch McConnell, I’d drag that impeachment trial on for months, by the way. Why not? Suck all the air out of the room in DC, because it only benefits Trump and the GOP. The media will have to split its attention between the impeachment trial and the unimpressive Democrat primaries.
On the other hand, the impeachment vote could fail. There are 31 freshman Democrats this year who managed to win their seats in “Trump” districts in the 2018 primaries. They’re all vulnerable and don’t let the media kid you. Every single Democrat knows that voting for impeachment is a possible death sentence for their political careers.
What other option does Pelosi have? She could call the whole thing off and not hold an impeachment vote. That would enrage her base heading into 2020, which has to look about as appealing as a case of flesh-eating bacteria.
She could impeach and lose the Senate trial, impeach and lose the House vote, or not impeach and lose her base. Good luck with that, Nancy. You asked for it.