Conjuring impeachable crimes

It was ludicrous at best but given the Democratic majority in the House and the partisan nature of this impeachment, upon presentation to the plenary, Donald Trump was thus charged on that single article of Abuse of Power.

It is like waiting for the other shoe to drop. And in this particular case, the unlikely impeachment of an American president amid a booming economy, a panicked Lower House and a weak Democratic challenger mere months before an election, the delay isn’t only taking weeks, it may cross over the holidays and likely run well into 2020. The single article of impeachment that took over three years for the Democratic Party to conjure will probably need a little more time before it is transmitted to the United States Senate. Presently, it is dead in the water.

Pressured by a cabal of colleagues, embattled and desperate, Speaker of the House, Democrat Nancy Pelosi is taking her sweet time, dilly-dallying, foot-dragging, and praying for a miracle. The impeachable crime to justify negating the 2016 presidential outcome just isn’t there. Worse, the needle that measures the negative impact of the impeachment on Donald Trump hasn’t moved. At least not in the vote-rich swing states in Middle America that determines who wins the presidency.

Pelosi’s impeachment carriage has overtaken the horse that should be pulling it. Unfortunately the coach is empty. And that is most likely the reason for her unexpected refusal to transmit the articles to the Senate. There are no impeachable crimes for the Senate to try.

To understand Pelosi’s sudden stop, allow us to first take our bearings.

This partisan circus came to town even before the first congressional inquiry was convened. It should have ended almost as immediately but it did not. House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, with no knowledge of the actual content of a conversation between Trump and the Ukrainian President, ad-libbed it inaccurately.

The skinny is that he lied. He accused Trump of blackmailing the Ukrainian president with a quid pro quo deal. To his dismay, when the transcripts of the conversation were released, not only was there no quid pro quo, there was no crime.

The operant terms that the Intelligence Committee had used was “quid pro quo” to show that should Ukraine do as Trump requested, US aid would be forthcoming. Eventually, Ukraine did not act as requested, but the aid was released nevertheless. Thus, in both the transcripts and in actuality there was no “quid pro quo.”

With egg on their faces the Democrats then proceeded to fill in the absence of a crime with interpretations of the transcript. Unfortunately interpretations are not evidence.

When the Democrats realized through focus groups that the term “quid pro quo” did not resonate with the public, they resorted to the terms “extortion” and “bribery” — legalese with distinct definitions and evidence requisites in the statute books.

Passing the baton on to the House Justice Committee, the Justice chair attempted to fill in the absence of evidence with testimonies of academicians. But none had any first-hand knowledge and thus were unqualified as witnesses. Their testimony was stuck in the theoretical sludge, there unmoving and almost totally useless. To worsen matters the substance of conceptual testimonies depends on who was invited to testify and who wasn’t. In this case, it was one-sided.

And then the accusations of bribery or extortion curiously morphed into the wildly generic “Obstruction of Congress” and “Abuse of Power.” In the original Constitution written by the Founding Fathers both terms are not impeachable offenses.

Once again lacking an impeachable crime on both of these articles, the Justice Committee had to settle for “Abuse of Power.” It was ludicrous at best but given the Democratic majority in the House and the partisan nature of this impeachment, upon presentation to the plenary, Donald Trump was thus charged on that single article of “Abuse of Power.”

The next step should have been to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Republican-held Senate for trial. But since the Democrats were shooting blanks, Pelosi suddenly opted for coitus interruptus to allowing for a miracle, or more time to dig up a more potent charge. How pathetic is that?