Democrats are going ahead with an impeachment that hasn’t a chance in the Senate

President Donald Trump prepares to speak at a campaign rally in Hershey, Pennsylvania earlier this week. Picture: AP

Disruption ahead, Lawrence Lessig, Politico website, December 7:

As the House of Representatives races towards its self-imposed deadline of Christmas to vote on the impeachment of Donald Trump, it’s easy to assume this is a path the nation has walked before … But that’s the wrong way to see it. Impeachment is a profoundly disruptive event, and when we think about what could happen to the country, we need to recognise just how different this time is. The nation has never entered impeachment proceedings in a media environment — and hence a political environment — like this one. That difference will matter profoundly to our democracy … Or media institutions that need to consider how to limit the potential damage … The business model of hate may well pay for politicians and the media. But the cost … will be profound. 

Rachel Bovard, American Greatness website, December 7:

Donald Trump’s presidency has done a lot of things, but perhaps one of its most striking effects has been unmasking the contempt with which the elites view the rest of us … (elites who are) confident in their ability to control the media and cultural discourse, groom and anoint the “right” politicians, and occasionally tut-tut about the rubes in Middle America.

"The polling has got to make [the Democrats] feel queasy."

Conservative Partnership Institute's @rachelbovard and @EricBolling discuss how the impeachment hearings have tanked so badly.

More: https://t.co/i7H0MRu2sX pic.twitter.com/00cx28FZd6

— BlazeTV (@BlazeTV) December 8, 2019

Impious Nancy, Roger Simon, The Epoch Times, Sunday:

Perhaps the most telling moment of the past few years … occurred when reporter James Rosen asked Speaker Nancy Pelosi: “Do you hate President Trump?” You don’t have to be Sigmund Freud to have seen the extreme defensiveness of her response … Wrapping herself in the mantle of her Catholicism and with the rigidity of a central casting schoolmarm, she informed us she loved all humanity, hated no one, prayed for Trump all the time, and then excoriated Rosen for daring to ask such a question, before stomping off in a distinctly impious fashion.

JUST PUBLISHED> Suppose They Threw an Impeachment and Nobody Came? https://t.co/VahEG59WW6 via @epochtimes. @rogerlsimon

— Roger Simon (@rogerlsimon) December 8, 2019

Mournful Nancy, Todd Purdum, The Atlantic, December 6:

Her mournful countenance made it clear. Nancy Pelosi has at last found herself where she never wanted to be: leading an impeachment of President Donald Trump that has drawn nary an ounce of bipartisan backing in congress.

Banged to rights, Laurence Tribe, USA Today, December 7:

A president who uses the powers unique to his office to solicit what by any definition is a bribe, commits one of the cardinal sins the constitution identifies as requiring that president’s removal from office.

Economy’s booming, John Kass, Chicago Tribune, December 6:

With American unemployment numbers at a 50-year low, with people working and with money in their pockets, stubborn Democrats rush forward on their path toward madness … though they have no hope of securing a conviction in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Americans are working, 266,000 new jobs created last month, unemployment at 50-year-low. So what are Democrats doing? Self-destructing. Pelosi caves to hard left & follows Inspector Javert on the road to madness. #impeachment https://t.co/CCFwTnuMD4

— John Kass (@John_Kass) December 7, 2019

Charles Gasparino, New York Post, December 6:

Democrats are obsessed with impeachment … they would rather not draw attention to President Trump’s economic success … For all of Trump’s bad judgment in the Ukraine affair, which will undoubtedly lead to his impeachment in the house … he has shown amazingly good judgment in economic policy.

House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler, CNN, Sunday:

We have a very rock-solid case. I think the case we have, if presented to a jury, would be a guilty verdict in about three minutes flat.