Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., gives his opening statement as former special counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on his report on Russian election interference, on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, July 24, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
If you found something better to do with your time yesterday than watch the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment hearing, congrats on living a happier, healthier life.
To say it was pointless is an understatement. In a proceeding that allowed Democrats three “experts” to one for Republicans, we heard all manner of ridiculous commentary and analysis. The three legal scholars for the Democrats did exactly what I thought they’d do, which is project a partisan elitism that turns off most of America. And to be sure, their partisanship was not in question at any point throughout the day.
Obviously, the dumbest comments came from Pamela Karlan, who RedState reported on yesterday for having made a joke about Trump’s son to slap at the bad orange man.
Ironically, the same media that burst in like the Kool-Aid man to defend 50-year-old Hunter Biden some months back had very little to say about Karlan’s statements except to spin them as a “Republicans pounce” story.
Karlan went on to give a non-apology in which she said she was sorry, but also that Trump should be really sorry, too, or something.
“I want to apologize for what I said earlier about the president's son. It was wrong of me to do that. I wish the president would apologize, obviously, for the things that he's done that's wrong, but I do regret having said that."pic.twitter.com/q7FGEHVsxI
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) December 4, 2019
But it wasn’t just that episode, which took most of the headlines but was hardly the extent of the ridiculousness on display. Even getting into the legal arguments that were made, it was all just so mind-numbingly stupid. One constant refrain we heard was that Trump has declared himself a “monarch.”
Prof. Michael Gerhardt: "I cannot help but conclude that this President has attacked each of the Constitution's safeguards against establishing a monarchy in this country." #ImpeachmentHearings pic.twitter.com/jiMECykLmO
— The Hill (@thehill) December 5, 2019
Oddly enough, Gerhardt managed to appear before the Judiciary Committee without having his head lopped off afterward. Trump sucks at this monarchy thing.
All of this smacks of the Trump-Hitler comparisons, in which liberals accuse the President of being a tyrannical fascist while furiously typing on their phones from the freedom of their basements. If Trump were a “monarch” or “Hitler,” you wouldn’t be able to say that out loud. Gerhardt’s own ability to do so undercuts his argument. Perhaps you’d expect this kind of idiocy from random Twitter users, but this guy is supposedly a constitutional scholar. If this is what our elite law schools are pumping out these days, it’s not a good look for the profession.
David Harsanyi wrote a good piece this morning on the absurdities at play. He opens with this statement.
But however smart people such as Michael Gerhardt, distinguished professor of constitutional law at University of North Carolina, might be, they aren’t immune from peddling partisan absurdities. Once Gerhardt argued that Trump’s conduct was “worse than the misconduct of any prior president,” we no longer had any intellectual obligation to take him seriously on the topic.
Harsanyi goes on to list various events throughout history which were clearly worse than anything Trump is even being accused of. Yet, three “experts” sat before Congress yesterday and consistently asserted that history began in 2016, painting Trump’s mostly innocuous phone call as being worse than interning Japanese Americans and the Trail of Tears. Did I mention how stupid this hearing was?
I said before this farce started that Nadler’s strategy showed just how bad he is at this. That was proven a correct read in spades yesterday. By the end of the day, more people had Googled that exercise bike commercial everyone is talking about than anything about impeachment. This show is over. Democrats may have the votes to send the matter to Senate, but as a matter of public opinion, the jury has already come back with the verdict.
Perhaps Nancy Pelosi’s instincts were right to avoid this for so long? Unfortunately for her, she’s not in control over her own party anymore. The left demanded this and they will now reap the consequences. It won’t be good for Democrats over the long term.
Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive to read more of my latest articles.
Find me on Twitter and help out by following @bonchieredstate