House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared on the Democrat-friendly ABC News program “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” last Sunday, where he allowed her to filibuster on impeachment without interruption or tough questions (par for the course for Democrat interviews). Let’s parse a couple of her statements.
- Pelosi: “I’m telling you that he [Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell] signed on on Thursday to a resolution to dismiss the case. The dismissing is a cover-up. Dismissing is a cover-up. If they want to go that route, again, the senators who are thinking now about voting for witnesses or not, they will have to be accountable for not having a fair trial.”
Me: Looks like she’s got a new focus group-tested phrase: “dismissing is a cover-up.” A ridiculous statement! The Senate controls the trial process completely and can write whatever rules that a majority supports. Dismissal is a strawman argument because the President has already stated that he wants to see an acquittal – which is exactly what will happen. And she’s stuck on the “fair trial” narrative, too. It’s not a courtroom trial; it’s a political process, with the process rules set according to what the majority votes for.
- Pelosi: “[W]e have confidence in our case that it’s impeachable and this president is impeached for life, regardless of any gamesmanship on the part of Mitch McConnell; however, that could stay come to bear. But we’re confident in the impeachment. And we think there’s enough testimony to remove him from office.”
Me: And another focus group-tested phrase surfaces: “impeached for life.” A meaningless political statement if there ever was one. What matters is whether the President is removed from office or not. His impeachment by a rabidly partisan Democrat House will become but an asterisk in the history books after this farce is over. And she accuses Mitch McConnell of “gamesmanship”? LMAO! What does she think she’s been doing by holding onto the articles of impeachment these several weeks will demanding that the Senate run the trial the “Democrats’ way”? Finally, she demonstrates her intellectual coherence yet again by saying that there’s enough testimony to remove him from office yet at the same time demanding new witnesses testify in the Senate (the implication being that the case is paper thin – which of course it is).
- Pelosi: “We’ve done our job. We’ve defended the constitution of the United States. … It’s a constitutional challenge, and we feel very proud of the courage of our members to vote to impeach the president. There’s nothing that the Senate can do that can ever erase that.”
Me: There’s another focus group-tested phrase: “we’ve defended the Constitution.” What the heck does that actually mean? I wish someone would press her for an answer on that. They concocted two articles of impeachment out of nothing – no direct evidence of impeachable crimes, hearsay evidence, personal opinions, and wishful thinking – while ignoring exculpatory evidence. That’s not courage, Nancy, that’s partisan hackery. And Jonathan Turley called it what it really was – an abuse of power by the House Democrat caucus in accusing the President of a high crime and misdemeanor by going to the courts to determine whether certain administration witnesses should be allowed to testify.
- Pelosi: “Let’s be optimistic about the future, a future that will not have Donald Trump in the White House one way or another. Ten months from now we will have an election if we don’t have him removed sooner. But, again, he’ll be impeached forever.”
Me: Wishful thinking if there ever was any. The President isn’t going to be removed from office with no evidence of impeachable criminal conduct. Ain’t happening, and even the RINO senators aren’t going to commit political seppuku by voting for removal based on nothing. And I guess she’s not been watching the turnouts at his ongoing rallies, which contain sizable numbers of registered Democrats in attendance. I particularly like the extended standing ovation he and FLOTUS received at the NCAA football championship game Monday night, too. I wonder if she watched that? Better get used to a second term for the President.
- Pelosi: It’s not unpleasant to talk about the Constitution of the United States. This is what we take an oath to protect and defend. This is what this president has violated again and again. This is a president who has said Article II says I can do whatever I want. It does not. This is a president — a Constitution that Benjamin Franklin said is a republic if we can keep it (sic). Not a monarchy. And Article II that says, well, I can do whatever I want, makes it a monarchy. So, this is a defiance of the valor of our Founders and what they established — disloyal to his oath of office.
Me: Like much of what the President says, that Article II quote has been taken out of context and spun by Democrats for their political benefit. The comment refers to his ability to fire people in the executive branch like former FBI Director James Comey or former Navy Secretary Richard Spencer. I like how she brings up the monarchy gambit after that play failed during the impeachment farce (remember the sick pun attempted by Democrat witness Pamela Karlan on the President’s son’s name?). They continually allege the President of acting like a king and being disloyal to his oath of office yet cannot produce a single example of him doing either. All they do is repeat the big lie.
- Pelosi: “I think that the American people have been very fair about saying, yes, we do want to see witnesses. That wasn’t part of the discussion three weeks ago. It is now.”
Me: Wishful thinking again. Democrat/media push-polls aren’t going to force witness testimony in a Senate trial, particularly if the “Clinton impeachment rules” are adopted. The House managers will present their case based on their completed “investigation” and the witnesses that they questioned.
- Pelosi: “The President of the United States is in complete denial about Russia’s role. As I have said in terms of this president, all roads lead to Putin. He has — he said he’s not going to accept the assessment of our own intelligence agents, that they are — that they were very much involved in 2016 election. That 24/7 now they are still engaged. He’s trying to blame it on Ukraine and this silliness that has been debunked again and again, but he and his folks still keep advancing it. Everything that he has done, whether it’s in Syria vis-a-vis the Turks, whether it’s been in Ukraine in terms of withholding assistance as they try to fight the Russians, his denial about their role in our election then and now, all roads lead to Putin. And sometimes I wonder about Mitch McConnell, too, what’s he — why is he an accomplice to all of that. He has resisted the sources …
Me: Pelosi is stuck on Russia (“all roads lead to Putin”). That’s not what Mueller’s investigation concluded, and the President has never denied Russian meddling in the 2016 election. But you Democrats have denied meddling by the Ukrainians (and others) by claiming it’s just a “conspiracy theory” when there is ample evidence of real interference. In addition, Democrats haven’t owned up to the fact that the Hillary Clinton campaign paid a UK national to collect dirt on candidate Trump – some of which came from Russian sources. Now THAT is real foreign – and Russian! – interference in the 2016 election. The rest is a false narrative about Russia – the Syria situation is on its way to resolution (haven’t seen much about it in the news lately because the story doesn’t support the Democrat narrative), the Ukrainians got their lethal aid and that Mitch McConnell is somehow an “accomplice” in President Trump’s supposed kowtowing to Vladimir Putin. That last bit is flat-out crazy.
- Pelosi: Pelosi (continuing in virtual incoherence): … going in a manner (garbled) with the threat for state agencies, whichever they are in a state, could be the secretary of state or whatever, to protect our infrastructure, our critical infrastructure, of elections. He says you shouldn’t even call that critical infrastructure. So, it’s all of a piece with them. And that’s why it’s really important for the facts to come forward, the witnesses to be heard, the documentation to be reviewed so that the American people can see, so that no other president in the future could ever think that it’s OK to engage in the way that this president has, to undermine the Constitution, undermine our national security and doing so, as well as jeopardizing the integrity of our elections.
Me: I’ve watched that part of her filibustering several times and can’t quite figure out what all that rambling nonsense means, exactly. It’s pretty much incoherent. That seems to be associated with another Democrat focus group-tested phrase: “the integrity of our elections.” And she’s apparently claiming that the President and the Executive Branch in general aren’t doing anything to prevent Russian meddling in the 2020 elections. That’s nonsense, as there are a number of cyber-related initiatives underway, as well as state reviews of voter rolls to cut down on voter fraud (but then you never see Democrats discuss the REAL threat to “election integrity” – voter fraud!). And she finishes up by segueing back into impeachment, witnesses, documentation, and alleged presidential undermining of the Constitution. All allegations repeated endlessly without proof.
All Pelosi conveyed in that interview was the standard Democrat impeachment narrative and the same old phrases, none of which resonate with fair-minded people who watched the House impeachment farce. The woman’s body language was interesting to watch through the interview. She’s quite spastic and agitated throughout, making emphatic hand gestures and reminding me of nothing so much as a harpy. Will her grandstanding end if/when the articles of impeachment are sent to the Senate? Doubtful.