CNN anchor Jake Tapper was blasted for a tweet he made today comparing the “differences” between the Clinton impeachment the Trump impeachment today.

From Fox News:

“Big differences between Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton at this point was publicly contrite and partisans supporting him mostly argued that what he did was wrong, just not impeachable,” Tapper contended. “This president is on the attack and his partisans deny facts and any wrongdoing.”

Big differences between Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton at this point was publicly contrite and partisans supporting him mostly argued that what he did was wrong, just not impeachable. This president is on the attack and his partisans deny facts and any wrongdoing.

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) December 18, 2019

“This is only the second time in modern American history this has happened. This is a serious day, a solemn day, a traumatic day in many ways. In fact, when you think about the last time the country went through this during the Clinton years in the late-’90s, a big difference was back then, you had a president who was contrite, who was apologetic, and he was supported by the Democratic Party but they were saying what he did was wrong, it just wasn’t impeachable,” Tapper explained. “Here, for the most part, we have a president who is defiant. He wrote a rather… I don’t know how to express it, rude and defiant letter to [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi yesterday, and you have a Republican Party that is saying that the president did nothing wrong — for the most part.”

What a complete rewrite of history.

First, before you even got to an impeachment inquiry, you had the independent counsel Ken Starr actually find real charges of obstruction and perjury, 11 counts. It wasn’t just sex, as some Democrats wanted to spin it then and now. Starr found among other things that Clinton lied under oath and that he had attempted to bribe Lewinsky to lie.

The case against Trump was so weak and so rushed, there was no such finding of any guilt by an independent counsel, no finding of any actual crimes, they went into the proceeding with nothing. Only in the last week did they pull out of the hat the amorphous umbrella of “abuse of power” and “obstruction.” Even the “obstruction” was ridiculous, obstruction based on the fact that Trump challenged requests for witnesses and documents in court. Since when has availing oneself of one’s rights been “obstruction?” They not only didn’t prove their case, they refused to allow presentation of fact witnesses on behalf of the president and ignored the word of exculpatory witnesses and evidence, such as the transcript which didn’t support their claim of a quid pro quo, all the witnesses who testified they were never told of a quid pro quo and the word of the Ukrainians who said there was never a quid pro quo made to them.

Second, Clinton was hardly contrite. At any point. Nor were his supporters. That’s simply contra-factual.

Can there be anyone who forgets the utter disdain with which he treated the proceeding by claiming “it depends on what the meaning of is, is?”

Here’s what Clinton told the grand jury (according to footnote 1,128 in Starr’s report):

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the–if he–if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not–that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement….Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”

Can we forget “I never had sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky? I never told anyone to lie, not a single time (Ken Starr found he did, multiple times).”

No, the allegations weren’t false. And his supporters look so contrite too with all that clapping, right?

Unlike Clinton there’s plenty of exculpatory evidence and Democrats haven’t proven their case. And unlike Clinton, Democrats have been on a witch hunt since he was elected to impeach Trump for any reason or no reason. Trump and his supporter should rightly feel aggrieved. Sorry, Jake, if that letter was rude. But maybe you should look at it again, because it was right.

The real abuse of power was governmental entities surveilling the Trump team, abusing their authority, with the help and instigation of a Democratic-funded operative with Russian information. The IG report confirmed that. That’s the collusion Democrats were ranting about, of which they were accusing Trump. Where is the justice for that?

Is it any wonder that Trump should find this whole process ridiculous and attack it? Attacking it is a sure sign of sanity.

This was a completely partisan impeachment, with the opposition being bipartisan. That should be the headline.

But seeing that might require an act of journalism. Or at least a mind open to the truth.

That seems lost on Jake Tapper.