It’s time to step away from last week’s impeachment hearings to examine something significant. It’s apparent that Adam Schiff’s Democrats specialize in partisanship. It’s apparent because the supposed high crimes and misdemeanors President Trump was accused of committing kept changing.

In her article, Mollie Hemingway wrote “Before we get to the politics and how they were played by Republicans and Democrats, it should be noted that President Donald Trump has not been credibly accused of committing any crime, much less a high crime or misdemeanor. It’s almost shocking that Trump, of all people, keeps managing to do well on this score. Yet, as with the Russia collusion hoax, in which he was accused of being a traitor to his country, the lack of evidence for the charges against him is his ultimate saving grace.”

She continued with this:

What the charge is keeps changing, of course. The whistleblower initially suggested a campaign finance violation arising from a call Trump had with the president of Ukraine. That morphed into a quid pro quo for military aid to Ukraine, then extortion, then bribery, then obstruction of justice, then back to a quid pro quo, but this time only a quid pro quo for a White House meeting. The lack of certainty among even Trump’s critics certainly worked in his favor.

Let’s get this straight. Each of these charges is laughable. They’re laughable to the extent that extortion and bribery were suggested by focus groups commissioned by the DCCC, the Democrats’ campaign committee commissioned with losing the Democrats’ House majority in 2020. (That wasn’t what they were hired to do. That’s what will happen. It’s like the old Shakey’s Pizza saying — ‘We’re a non-profit. It wasn’t planned that way. That’s just how things worked out.’)

Seriously, though, Democrats kept switching from one ridiculous accusation to the next. They didn’t have proof for their accusations. Democrats simply relied on the MSM to sell the charges. That’s what happens when muscles atrophy. They relied more on the media, less on legitimate, well-researched arguments. The Democrats’ eutrophication was best displayed by Ms. Pelosi’s choice between Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler to spearhead the Democrats’ Impeachment Committee. Schiff is terrible but he’s significantly better than Nadler.

To impeach a president, you need evidence of a major offense that everyone looks at, then says ‘Yep, that’s an impeachable offense.’ The Democrats don’t have that. It’s like the football team with 3 QBs. That team really doesn’t have any. When you have 3-5 impeachable offense theories, you’re really not in the ballpark. You might not even be in the parking lot outside the ballpark.

Meanwhile, Republicans on the Impeachment Committee took apart the Democrats’ ridiculous accusations with ease. Jim Jordan demolished Bill Taylor. Mike Taylor demolished Gordon Sondland. Elise Stefanik took apart Ambassador Yovanovitch:


John Ratcliffe demolished Lt. Col. Vindman:

The MSM won’t admit that they’re propping up House Democrats but that’s what’s happening. Republicans don’t need propping up because they’re taking the Democrats’ testifiers apart with precision and discipline. It helps that the facts are on the Republicans’ side. It helps that the Democrats’ testifiers have relied on weasel-word testimony.

4 Responses to “Democrats’ partisanship vs. GOP leadership”

  • eric z says:

    Leadership vs. partisanship? Have you seen the claim that one of the Florida Ukranians tied to Giuliani asserted; that Nunes met in Vienna after the 2018 election with Shokin before the new Congress began under Democratic leadership. You can Google = nunes shokin parnas

    Then filter the returned list for “NEWS” or by time/recency. Apparently Vicky Ward at CNN broke the story. It is Parnas speaking through counsel, Parnas wanting Fifth Amendment concessions [immunity] before willingly testifying per such offer of proof. There may be documents?

    That would be Nunes wanting to dig dirt on Biden, dating back to then – but under the same claim as Trump of soliciting foreign interference in U.S. elections.

  • eric z says:

    About the Nunes allegation. Nunes denies, but beyond that it appears he has publicly said he intends to sue CNN and Daily Beast – I have seen that reported online. It looks to be more collateral drama, where we need to wait and see.

  • Gary Gross says:

    I can do better than that, Eric. Rep. Nunes told Maria Bartiromo this morning that he’ll file the suit in federal court right after Thanksgiving. This isn’t gossip like we saw from the testifiers last week. It’s the truth from person with firsthand knowledge.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Here’s the story:

    “I’ve been used to this for the last three years,” Nunes told Fox News. “The House Intelligence Committee Republicans, we continue to expose Democrat corruption over and over again. And what always happens is right when we expose them… they go out to kill the messenger.”

    “So this week, another fake news story. The problem with this week’s fake news story is, we actually caught them,” he continued. “And we caught them badly and it also involves criminal activity… We are going to take both CNN and the Daily Beast likely into federal court, right after Thanksgiving and we hope they cooperate.”

    I watched this interview. Mr. Nunes is deadly serious about this & he’s got the goods on CNN & the Daily Beast. Indeed, this should be fun.

Leave a Reply