The process the Democrats have employed to gin up support for impeaching President Donald Trump has been almost as long as Chairman Mao’s long march. It has also been tragically absurdist. It is filled with twists and turns as the Democrats slog through the muck they have raked up in their attempt to obviate the 2016 presidential election by overthrowing the will of the American voter and throwing out President Trump.
Their march commenced with Trump’s historic election in November 2016, which prompted a Texas Democrat to announce his intention to introduce Articles of Impeachment within months of President Trump assuming office.
Democrats have tossed every piece of dirt and dung at the president hoping that something would stick. Well, nothing has. People who just throw anything in the air end up covered with the stuff they are tossing. In other words, if you ever want to know what the Democrats are doing, just observe what they are accusing everyone else of doing.
The Russia Accusations Were Proven False
Take Hillary Clinton. She was so devastated by her loss to President Trump that she joined others to claim the Trump campaign had “colluded” with the Russians to affect the outcome of the election. After 22 months of the Robert Mueller investigation, even his team of politically biased investigators concluded that there had been no “collusion,” conspiracy, coordination, or cooperation.
But we did find the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee had engaged an opposition research firm with ties to Russia and the United Kingdom to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump. The now-infamous Steele dossier was created out of whole cloth using those foreign sources to simply make up some of the most outrageous lies against Trump in the history of American politics.
And now Nancy Pelosi, who had attempted to slow down Democrats’ impeachment fantasies, has yielded to the pressure of her radical colleagues. She has spread this unauthorized “impeachment inquiry” among six different House Committees, ostensibly freezing out House Judiciary because Chairman Jerrold Nadler continues to embarrass Democrats with his pronouncements and ineffective hearings that have brought their less-than-stealthy intention to impeach President Trump to public disapprobation.
That leads us to the process Speaker Pelosi now wishes to employ—a process that betrays the precedent for these proceedings. Pelosi has gotten caught up in Trump Derangement Syndrome. During the Nixon and Clinton proceedings, the attorneys for those presidents could represent their clients, and in some cases, they were allowed to question witnesses. Not so in the 2019 political attack by Democrats.
Impeachment is “somber,” Pelosi says. If she truly believed that, then why would she select one of the most-virulent Trump attackers to lead the investigation? Of course, impeachment is a partisan process, but in the Nixon and Clinton cases there was overwhelming, bipartisan support for the investigations, confirmed by a vote of the full House to authorize them. Why so different now?
Because, in the aforementioned cases, there were allegations that many believed were, or easily could be, substantiated. Further, in the earlier proceedings, each side believed the rules of impeachment would be followed, but we haven’t even voted on such rules in President Trump’s case. And as I mentioned earlier, Democrats have hyped impeachment of Donald J. Trump since Election Day 2016.