Will Pelosi have the Votes to Impeach?
Renée Parsons
Despite an inadequate performance last week by Constitutional law experts before the House Judiciary Committee, Chair Jerrold Nadler released a unilateral committee report on Saturday entitled “Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment.” The Report came the day after Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s press conference in which she directed the formation of Articles of Impeachment.
As has become apparent to any objective observer; that is one who prefers facts over fiction, the Democrats remain locked in an imaginary world struggling to maintain relevance, a stature of standing that no longer exists.
Presumably with no Quid Pro Quo, no allegation of criminal conduct, no legally substantial evidence or factual basis and no bipartisan support, in defiance of previous impeachment norms, the Democrats are hell bent on making public jackasses out of themselves.
In a hearing with Constitutional legal experts expected to score big legal points in support of impeachment, the witnesses instead turned out to be smug, hyper partisan activists as they were consistently unpersuasive and unimpressive.
All three displayed not a wit of objectivity or neutrality while touting their own personal political agenda with a foreign policy ax to grind, leaving the unmistakable impression that their testimonies were nothing short of conflated.
Condescending as if pontificating to a class of mediocre law students, Professor Noah Feldman had suggested in 2017 that Presidential tweets could be grounds for impeachment, indicative of the depth of his thinking as he repeatedly impressed himself with his own rhetoric.
Professor Pamela Karlan opened with a shrillness that grew into a hyperbole spewing divisiveness among the American people and went on to revisit the Russiagate and foreign electoral influence myth ad nauseam. Those dim witted Democrats on the committee repeated the mantra as if held in a spellbound trance whenever “Russiagate” was mentioned. There was no mention of Israel interference in US elections. Testimony of Professor Michael Gerhardt.
Stating that he had not voted for Trump in 2016, GWU Law Professor Jonathan Turley who is a registered Democrat (as is yours truly) opened with a brilliant statement as he set the tone for an extraordinarily compelling testimony throughout the day, carefully explaining to the Democrats why they had not met a credible legal threshold for impeachment.
Factually concise with rational, impartial explanations, Turley effectively disputed Democratic claims that an abuse of power stemming from a presumed effort to help one’s own re-election is “inferred” and does not constitute proof of intent or direct knowledge of what was in the President’s mind.
However, it did not appear that any of the Democrats had the acute sensibility to understand Turley’s point as there is an edge of lunacy to the collective Democratic mind these days.
What the Democrats fail to grasp is the double-standard that every politician makes decisions based on what is best for their reelection just as the Dems are hoping to benefit electorally in 2020 with the farcical impeachment.
After his testimony, Mr. Turley tweeted. “Before I finished my testimony, my home and office were inundated with (death) threatening messages and demands that I be fired from GW.”
While it was surprising that there was no Democratic Star on either the Intel or Judiciary Committees who stepped forward to make a credible, cogent case for impeachment, it was somewhat surprising that the Republicans had an energetic array of participating Members not limited to Intel ranking member Devin Nunes (Calif), Judiciary ranking minority Rep. Doug Collins (NC), Rep. Jim Jordan (Oh), Rep. John Ratcliffe (Texas) and Rep. Mark Gaetz (R-Fla) all of whom can be expected to continue their Bulldog approach as the Committee begins preparing Articles of Impeachment.
For instance, Rep. Martha Roby (R-Ala) asked the defining question regarding the purpose of the hearing with “no fact witnesses” via a process that has been “insufficient, unprecedented and grossly inadequate.” Roby pointed out that the Dems had apparently not considered: that a constitutional law panel should come “only after specific charges have been made known and underlying facts presented in full due to an exhaustive investigation. How does anyone expect a panel of law professors to weigh in on legal grounds for impeachment prior to knowing what the grounds brought by this Committee are going to be?
At her news conference the day after the Judiciary committee hearing, Pelosi was asked by a reporter “Do you hate President Trump?” Pelosi responded with a shaky false piety as if she knows the votes are not there:
We don’t hate anybody. Not anybody in the World. And as a Catholic, I resent your using the word ‘hate’ in a sentence that addresses me. I don’t hate anyone. I was raised in a way that is full – a heart full of love and always pray for the president, And I still pray for the president. I pray for the president all the time, So don’t mess with me when it comes to words like that.
It is a curiosity that with the 2020 election a scant twelve months away, the Democrats have not made the case for the urgency of why impeachment needs to occur right now, immediately, before the Christmas holidays when the Spirit of Good Cheer, Universal Love and Peace for all Americans should take precedence over the Democrat’s divisive animosity, pitting one American against another.
In 2018, thirty-one new Democrats were elected to the House; predominately from districts that voted for Trump in 2016 assuring a tough 2020 re-election campaign.
Let’s assume that every one of those 31 newbies have been paying very close attention to the Intel and Judiciary committee hearings with two questions in mind:
Is there sufficient legal evidence to convince my constituents to support Articles of Impeachment and is this flawed impeachment campaign worth losing my seat in Congress?
Did any of those 31 notice when the Constitutional law experts were asked by Rep. Matt Gaetz “Can you identify one single material fact in the Schiff Report? – all four remained silent.
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-0SC) has already indicated that he does not intend to ‘whip” the Dems in preparation for an Impeachment vote on the House floor and that the Dems “expect to lose some votes.”
Let’s do the math: With 233 Dems and 197 Republicans, if 18 of the 31 House newbies do not vote to impeach, the Democratic Motion to approve Articles of Impeachment will fail with a tie of 215 votes. Whether the Dems lose 18 votes or less, the damage will be irreversible.
As the Democratic party appears to have lost whatever is left of its sanity and integrity, the question remains why are the Democrats willing to sacrifice losing some of those 31 House seats in 2020?
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
There are many more postscripts to be written about the Uber damning expose of the lying cheating dishonourable thieving American military in WaPo a few days ago.
One is the startling lack of MSM or even outre media coverage of the most seminal revelation and analysis of this type in decades. It’s Pentagon Paers redux but worse and crazier. Death penalties seem far too lenien for the many perps and enablers.I have given a link on a previous thread. But alerts sent to your box on every bit of foul air coming out any backside as long as it is supporting this ridiculous impeachment folly.
How can the descendants of the family founding the Guardian tolerate its volte-face to become a wacko, scheming right wing budgiecage liner?
It’s okay Renee, don’t worry. Your beloved right wing authoritarian racist, misogynist, globalist capitalist fascist jerk Trump will remain in office.
The Deep State has his back, and so do you.
This whole Schiff-Show is just bizarre. Why are the Dems doing this? In an election year to boot? There is just zero chance that the Senate will remove Trump from office, and the case against him is a total laughing stock anyway. All that’s going to happen is that the senators are going to start discussing L’affaire Biden openly and loudly, thereby killing the Dem’s current front-runner. Is that what Pelosi wants? Meanwhile, none of their other three dozen or so candidates are going to get any media at all, once this impeachment sucks all the oxygen right out of the room. Is that intentional?
All I can say is, you have to really dig all the way to the bottom of the tinfoil-cooler to find an explanation for this one. Others it makes no sense whatsoever.
The explanation is that it is a distraction, a diversion, from their own criminality. The perversion and politicisation of what is laughingly referred to as the “justice ” system, by the rabidly partisan spook agencies and the dirty cops under the auspices of Obama and Clinton. The Russiagate hoax, the Steele dossier, the perjury committed to obtain the FISA warrant to spy on and derail a political campaign, and when that failed, the treasonous and seditious conspiracy to destroy an elected government.
The Democrats are like an octopus squirting out a jet of black ink when threatened. They want to keep this circus going until November, when they hope to have won the election and it can all be quietly forgotten. They expected to win in 2016, in which case those responsible for this hoax and conspiracy would have been quietly rewarded for services rendered without any further repercussions.
The most likely outcome is that a few of the small fry, Strzok, Page, McCabe and their ilk, will be offered up as sacrificial lambs. The Obamas and the Clintons are too big to jail.
At the same time, it’s difficult to have much sympathy for Trump. He IS a corrupt, obnoxious, lying loudmouth, just like 99% of all US politicians. And he is quite happy to preside over incomparably worse regime change operations directed against Iran, Venezuela, Bolivia and countless other countries by subhuman filth like Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams. All that has happened is that Regime Change has finally come home.
But the main fall out from this tawdry and degrading spectacle will be the shredding of what little credibility remains of US institutions and what passes for its democratic system. Law enforcement, intelligence, the judicial system, the political parties, and the MSM, have been revealed as the irredeemably corrupt and degraded criminal organisations they are. They are the real casualties of this whole sorry saga.
And a precedent has now been established. Henceforth no elected president, of whatever stripe, can expect to complete a term in office without being subjected to a similar process on specious grounds. Any highly dubious Kavanagh type sex allegation from decades ago, any crudely forged birth certificate, any blatant hoax or smear, will do.
This person has made herself ridiculous by refusing to impeach GWB in 2003, when she knew he was lying about Iraq’s weapons.
What has Trump done which is comparable to that death toll?
Proof enough that Washington has nothing more to say to human beings.
The place belongs in The Book of Revelation – and not in the optimistic part…
The Democrats have taken the high road where Trump always takes the low road of unprofessionalism.
Democrats have two solid articles of impeachment which clearly indicate beyond a reasonable doubt that POTUS Trump is highly unethical and an inappropriate & unprofessional crook that is using his high office to thwart USA democracy and the voting process.
That bad orange man can’t obfuscate around the writing on the wall.
The pussy-grabber-in-chief is a social boor and a criminal politician thug.
Make America Gonzo again and get rid of the bad orange man occupying the White House before he turns it into the Whore House replete with a swamp full of political prostitutes & media prostitutes on their collective knees servicing corporate power.
MOU
So your argument consists essentially of name-calling to exercise your own demons. You make Trump look good, like the other stark raving lunatics opining on this , many in the Democratic Party. You have zero chance of unseating Trump by impeachment and by the looks of things that might not be such a bad thing, he said, making the sign of the cross and mouthing pagan incantations, begging forgiveness from the ether.
You recall Bill Maher’s comment before a previous election. “The Republicans have shifted to the right and the Dems have shifted right into the insane asylum.”
I don’t worship at Reverend Maher’s church.
MOU
If that was all Trump was doing he would pass unnoticed in Washington, when placed alongside the real war criminals like Bush and Obomber.
The Duck is bad for business on a global scale. Sure he is a NYC RE scion with history, but that history is not businesslike, professional, or conducive to world trade & deals to be made diplomatically.
Trump is not diplomatic.
He is embarrassing to professionals in business.
MOU
Trump should definitely be impeached. Regardless of whether he is or is not a Russian agent, tax dodger and pussy grabber, he cheats at golf, and that is unforgiveable. Just like Goldfinger, he would be drummed out of any golf club he didn’t own. He always tees off first, then roars off to the green in a souped up golf cart, like Toad of Toad Hall, where he kicks his own ball on to the green and other balls into the rough. Complete bounder. Impeachment is too good for him. He should be tarred and feathered and run out of town, after his golf clubs have been broken and his golf cap burnt.
Trump cheats at everything including golf. That is damnable in & of itself but the tax return thingy bugs me more than the golf cheating does. Heck, everyone that knows Trump is aware of his fragile ego & narcissistic rage run amok. Golfers playing with Trump would know he is a cheat before hand. Playing golf with a cheat is normal for tax cheats like Trump et al.
Tin Cup is a good golf movie but that’s as far as golf goes IMHO.
Bing Crosby & Bob Hope played golf.
MOU
Re Trump cheating… why it’s the American way!
Until is isn’t anymore.
MOU
Would Ms Parsons like to write an OpEd on the US Senate pushing forward false narratives that Russia is ‘a promoter of terrorism’?
The biggest promoter of terrorism workdwide since 1945 is the USA, be it through OSS, CIA, or other outsourced channels of coup-promoting violence….
Is it not time a motion were voted upon in the UN on precisely that postulate?
Unfortunately, as you know, the UN, like NATO, to all intents and purposes actually IS the USA, and vetoes all criticism of itself. And if vetoing doesn’t work, it just ignores the criticism. Other recent farces at the UN show the US and Israel sitting alone while the rest of the world condems them, and the condemnation is simply shrugged off.
Astonishing that educated adults put up with it, but there it is.
It is always good to hear of committed political activsts demanding that their own party stick to fundamental principles of justice, adherence to the Constitution etc etc.
There does come a point when you have to ask whether this is temporary insanity or metastatic terminal cancer.
If it is the latter, America needs new political parties…
I sometimes wonder why there are only two political parties there…
But, on the other hand, I fear that adding another 10 corrupt parties, as has happened in Iceland and elsewhere, achieves nothing at all.
Soon we’ll be back where we were a few hundred thousand years ago, where the guy with the biggest muscles and the biggest rock gets to decide everything.
Two parties, both of which support only the super-rich, cannot be a blueprint for a future civilization worthy of the name.
Bravo Renee. I voted for Jill Stein in 2016 and the only democrat I will vote for in 2020 is Tulsi Gabbard.
So I suppose that makes me a pawn of Vladimir. I would love to be in touch with you Renee, and if thats possible perhaps you could email me. I am a big fan of Off Guardian as well.