What a joke.
Barry Berke, the attorney for Judiciary Committee Democrats, spent considerable time during Monday’s congressional impeachment inquiry making the case against Donald Trump by presenting, supposedly, all the facts and evidences and proofs and irrefutables of the president’s “corrupt abuse of power,” and so forth and so on.
But like all the other pro-impeach voices the Democrats have brought to Congress of late, Berke’s talk was all wisp, all smoke.
Berke played dramatic video clips of previous witnesses’ statements as basis for his pro-impeach argument. But thing is, these previous witnesses’ statements were themselves based on presumptions and suppositions and hearsay.
Berke’s whole argument for impeachment was built on shaky, shoddy ground.
The farce continues.
Honestly, didn’t we already establish in the last couple weeks that the witnesses the Democrats have brought to “prove” — and yes, that’s “prove” in quotation marks — the president’s quid pro quo guilt on Ukraine were all coming at their quid pro quo arguments from the side of supposition?
That their arguments for impeachment were all based on second and even third person accounts of Trump’s telephone call, and what he said she said they thought Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, could’ve, would’ve, should’ve wanted?
Something like that, anyway.
Remember: It was the Democrats big hope and dream for impeach, impeach, impeach, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, who came in November to the House Intelligence Committee with a big opening statement hammer that said, yes, Trump’s guilty of quid pro quo — only to acknowledge later, after the media got its headline, that well, Trump in a telephone call did say specifically, “I want nothing, I want no quid pro quo.”
Yet here comes Berke, the Democrats’ latest voice to impeach, using these same shoddy witness conjectures to pretend some sort of proof of impeachable offense that just doesn’t exist.
It’s such an offense to those with brains.
Berke may have fed the press plenty of racy remarks.
He may have given the left some headlines to use for egregiously partisan purposes.
He may have moved the circus show on to its next act.
This president’s guilty of a “corrupt abuse of power,” Berke said.
This president’s guilty of “attacks” on those who simply want to speak the truth, Berke said.
This president’s vile and evil and dastardly and must be impeached, Berke suggested.
“But fortunately, because of the true American patriots who came forward to testify,” he said, “they told the story … [and presented] clear and overwhelming evidence [how Trump] abused his powers in ways the Founding Fathers feared most.”
My, how noble.
Berke may have painted a rosy picture of Democrats as the defenders of the republic.
But as far as speaking factually and honestly? As far as bridging the great political divide in America?
Berke proved himself just another tool of the left.
Democrats, once again, reveal themselves as hot only for impeachment; cool on truth; cold as cold can be on honest discourse that puts the republic and American people before their party’s selfish, petty, personal ambitions.
• Cheryl Chumley can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or on Twitter, @ckchumley.