This afternoon the final vote on the Articles of Impeachment will be held. This mercifully will end over two weeks of rancorous debate that occupied wall-to-wall coverage on television.
To summarize the ending of the trial, the general consensus is that Adam Schiff and his merry band of prosecutors brought a flawed and unfair case to the Senate. Their overriding theme was that they were seeking a “fair” trial. This is somewhat ludicrous when their Impeachment inquiry was anything but fair.
To understand why this was a one-sided partisan exercise it might be well to go back to the very beginning. Apparently, a second-hand whistle blower went to the Schiff camp and said he had hearsay information that there was a link between releasing aid to Ukraine for an investigation of Hunter Biden and his father Joe. The so-called whistle blower was then referred to a Trump-hating lawyer who crafted the report that was given to the Inspector General (IG). The IG then said it was credible enough to warrant investigation.
The matter then went to Nadler’s committee and was quickly snatched from him by Pelosi who gave it to Schiff’s Intelligence Committee. It was at this point that Schiff started the ball rolling by reading a fictionalized transcript of the phone call. It was immediately countered by Trump releasing the legitimate transcript. In the early proceedings that were shown on TV, Schiff dominated the conversations. He was seen leading witnesses to the conclusion he wanted and stifling Republicans questioning. He also said that he would determine and have the final say on whether or not witnesses called by the Republicans could appear. This was the point at which the inquiry turned into the Inquisition.
Interestingly, Nancy Pelosi, she of the great legislative acumen, started the proceedings with a press conference. She must not have had a copy of the Constitution handy because it states that the House shall have the sole duty of drafting Articles of Impeachment. In her slightly rattled state, she forgot to call for a vote of the House, apparently thinking she was the complete House. Because of this fact, most of Schiff’s subpoenas were deemed invalid.
During the Senate trial the blatherskite Schiff regurgitated the same talking points that had marred the inquiry. He was followed by Nadler who started off by informing the Senators that they would be complicit in a cover up if they failed to indict Trump. Many trial lawyers that I have spoken with say the first thing you try to do in a trial proceeding is to get the jury on your side. The last thing you would ever do is accuse the jury of malfeasance.
Apparently, there is some bad blood between Schiff and Nadler because on Thursday evening one of the most riveting occasions occurred when the Chief Justice announced the House Managers would make a final statement. Schiff was closest to the mic, so he started to rise. Nadler, who was further away from the mike, quickly jumped up and shoved Schiff aside and raced to the mic. Schiff attempted to follow him shouting, “Jerry, Jerry, Jerry”. Nadler ignored him and took over for more of his diatribe and lecture to the lawmakers.
During the onerous trial, the defense team made mincemeat of Schiff’s group of repetitive lightweights. A virtually unknown barrister named Philbin carried the ball most of the time for the defense. His calm and unflappable approach easily countered the shouting Schiff team.
Another interesting facet of the trial was how easily veteran attorney and professor Dershowitz was able to explain how the Constitution actually works. Following the trial, he received the most accolades for his performance. His arguments were crisp and concise compared to Schiff’s rattling on and even referencing Washington Crossing the Delaware in his remarks. This was similar to Pelosi’s previous statements on TV about the Midnight Ride of Paul Revere.
As tedious as the whole Impeachment fiasco was, there was one satisfying element. It kept the fawning media from showing any of AOC’s mindless outbursts on the tube.
By now you know the result of Super Bowl LIV (54). It was supposed to be a classic matchup of great defense against great offense. Every time a Super Bowl appears on TV it reminds me of the first one on January 15, 1967 at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, when I was one of some 40 northern Nevadans who attended in person.