The Funhouse Mirror of Democrat Impeachment Theater

Many people are exuberant that Donald Trump has been impeached again. Wikipedia joined in giddily updating the “First Impeachment of Donald Trump” with the following alert: Not to be confused with “Second Impeachment of Donald Trump.” What is more historic is that Democrats have become the first political party to project their own Treason, Bribery, and other High Crimes and Misdemeanors onto a sitting President of the opposite political party not once, but twice.

The Democrat’s first impeachment included two articles: (i) Abuse of Power and (ii) Obstruction of Justice. The Abuse of Power article centered around Trump’s phone call with Ukraine. Trump requested assistance to investigate Joe Biden. Quid pro quo was the phrase of the month, with the implication that any tit-for-tat exchange between the two nations was somehow unfathomable. How could Trump hold up $400,000 of necessary and Congressionally-approved foreign aid!?!, bemoaned many.

Inconvenient for Trump, but necessary to the alleged corruption fact pattern, it was Trump’s political opponent who was being investigated. At the time, Biden’s son Hunter was allegedly under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor. Hunter was handsomely paid by a corrupt Ukrainian oil company. His only qualification: the spelling of his last name.

Joe Biden is on video boasting about threatening the loss of $1,000,000,000 of necessary and Congressionally-approved funding if the Ukraine prosecutor investigating his son was not fired. Well, Son-of-a-B*tch, as a result of Joe Biden’s quid pro quo, the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired and Biden’s son was off scot-free.

Trump had no choice but to work with Ukraine to obtain evidence of apparent corruption, and quid pro quo’s are how foreign relations get done. The key difference is Trump did not have any on-the-surface improper familial relations with Ukraine. Further, the amount Trump initially withheld from Ukraine was 2,500 times less than what Biden withheld. Finally, Ukraine was not even aware of Trump’s temporary withholding. Yet all Democrat Representatives impeached a Republican president based on projections of the Biden family’s on-the-record and dubious conduct in Ukraine.

The Obstruction of Justice article focused on Trump’s asserting Executive Privilege. Despite live legal challenges over Trump’s assertion, Democrats could not wait for resolution in the courts before impeaching Trump. He was imperiling the Union. This rationale was contradicted when Pelosi decided to hold on to the Articles of Impeachment for many weeks. During this wait, Pelosi blackmailed the co-equal other half of the Legislature to attempt to modify the Senate’s impeachment trial rules to her liking. 

Democrats should be quite familiar with inappropriate Executive Privilege assertions. Attorney General Holder refused to provide Congressionally requested Fast and Furious documents. This operation ended in the murder of a US Border Patrol agent with a gun from Holder’s Justice Department.

Holder became the first Attorney General held in contempt of Congress with a bipartisan vote. The dissenting Democrats, notably led by now-Speaker Pelosi, marched out of the House to protest the actions of the Republicans (and 17 Democrats) who held Obama’s wingman in contempt.

In the second impeachment, consisting of a single article, the Democrats (and 10 Republicans) stated that Trump incited violence against the Government of the United States. The article selectively quotes Trump as saying, “… if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

The article omits quoting Trump saying, “… everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” In attempting to fact-check if Trump directed the protestors to be peaceful and patriotic, Newsweek begrudgingly awarded a “Mostly True” rating, mixing in Trump’s claims of a stolen election. 

The list of Democrats projecting their own “incitement” into the impeachment articles includes Kamala “Protesters Should Not Let Up” Harris, Hillary “You Can’t Be Civil” Clinton, Cory “Get Up in the Face” Booker, Eric “When They Go Low, We Kick Them” Holder, and Nancy “Be Ready to Throw a Punch” Pelosi (a.k.a. Nancy “I Just Don’t Know Why There Aren’t Uprisings All Over the Country” Pelosi), among many others.

The single article of the Democrat’s second impeachment also suggests that Trump threatened a co-equal branch of the government by urging the Legislature not to certify the election. Most hypocritically, the Democrat’s second impeachment was immediately preceded by Nancy Pelosi passing a House Resolution to blackmail (a recurring theme for Pelosi) Vice President Mike Pence to enact the 25th Amendment (a wholly Executive-branch-initiated process) to remove President Trump under threat of Impeachment.

Further, Representative Pelosi and Senators Markey and McGovern pressured military leaders to remove Trump’s constitutionally appointed powers as Commander in Chief of the military. Specifically, Legislators directly pressured military generals to attempt to remove the Commander in Chief’s ability to use the nuclear arsenal.

The ability to use a nuclear arsenal is a necessary requirement of the Mutually Assured Destruction philosophy that has kept the world safe from total destruction for the entire nuclear age. Still, Pelosi was fine increasing the risk of global Armageddon based on her politically motivated misinterpretation of Trump’s role in the January 6 Capitol invasion.

Finally, getting the award for “Most Patience” is Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin, the lead manager of the second impeachment. Raskin waited nearly four years to decertify Trump as President since he first objected to cetifying Florida’s 29 Electoral votes in favor of Trump.

The Democrat’s second impeachment could not have removed President Trump from office before the scheduled inauguration and will thus be moot. Nor do the facts support any legal definition of the crime of incitement to violence. Yet the Democrats, joined by a handful of Republicans this time, voted to impeach Donald Trump, again.

Because there was no hope of removal in either impeachment it begs the question if the dual impeachment of Trump was wholly politically motivated virtue signaling. Democrats should worry about the precedent of this second impeachment. Namely, Georgia’s Stacey Abrams may have set herself up for political retribution after challenging her state’s rigged gubernatorial election and encouraging marginalized groups to fight in politics as the “most effective method of revolt.”

IMAGE: Internet meme, edited by Andrea Widburg

If you experience technical problems, please write to