FWIW, here's mine:
Hatred is not a basis for impeachment.
And hatred is all they've got.
We've heard the term quid-pro-quo. It is a ground for impeachment, if the left is to be believed.
Quid-pro-quo's like this one:
It's apparently OK for Vice President Joe Biden to engage in QPQ, but not President Trump.
How does THAT work?
We also already know that the democrats on the Committee have refused the Republican members the ability to call their witnesses, something that won't be an issue on the Senate side, should this ever get there.
Instead, we get "witnesses" like this:
And before anyone starts in on me concerning how one sided these videos are, here's the heart of the matter:
The issues Rep. Jordan discusses with these witnesses go directly to the center of the claims the democrats are raising as grounds for impeachment.
In short: the democrats have no case.
They accuse President Trump of doing something that then-Vice president Biden ADMITS to doing, on video.
Their witnesses conclude, presume, or heard things.
Hearsay is never grounds for any conviction.
And then, of course, we have this:
Ukraine president says 'no blackmail' in phone call with Trump
As a student of World War Two, I was frequently struck by many historians characterizing the last several months of Nazi Germany thusly:
"Most knew the war was lost. But most also knew that the only way Hitler could remain in power was on a sea of blood."
The parallel here is not democrats to Nazis. The parallel is the strategic aspect of the situation.
Some are suggesting that President Trump is showing a level of genius beyond that of Speaker Pelosi's comprehension. Some are agape at how foolishly she allowed herself to be maneuvered into making the biggest political mistake since King George stamped "Return to Sender" on all of those petitions the colonists sent to him about how he and his military were abusing the colonies.
There is no way possible to secure a 2/3rds vote in the Senate for impeachment. Pelosi isn't an idiot and she knows that. Polling would suggest that the independent vote is swinging towards the president as the left suffers their own, self-inflicted death by a thousand paper cuts; most recently the acknowledgement that the formerly trusted FBI had altered a document that was designed to enable that agency to spy on American citizens, including Donald Trump and his campaign... for presentation to the FISA court.
I also get that polling indicated the first name of our president today would be "Hillary," but here's the difference: for these pollsters to indicate that their research shows this blowing up in the democrat's face is likely an understatement.
So now, the House is faced with two choices, equally disastrous to them individually and politically:
1. Take these fantasies and turn them into "Articles of impeachment" and send it over to the Senate, where folks like Sen. Lindsey Graham are fired up and ready to blow it all open by subpoenaing everyone from Barack Obama on down... and how will that work out for the dems in a presidential election year?
2. Run this "investigation" to the end and drop it, admitting they had screwed up and that it never should have happened. They will likely lose the House... but it protects the democrat senators up for re-election in swing states by keeping the splatter off of most of them.
The problem is that there is clear evidence the leftists had no intention of ever working with the President on anything. There is equally clear evidence that all those occasions where the President made what were, at the time, outrageous claims like the FBI was spying on him and his campaign... well... weren't so outrageous after all.
I call it the Obama Factor. Obama lied to us so much and so often ("If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor..." etcetera) about so many things that towards the end of his disastrous tenure, no one believed him about anything.
The same thing applies to the House. How many times, for example, did Rep. Adam Schiff who is running this inquisition, tell us that he had rock solid evidence on Trump and Russian Collusion, evidence that he never presented because it didn't exist? Even now, how many times has he told us that he did not know who the alleged whistle-blower is, only to be tripped up by his own lies?
Indeed. If Schiff doesn't know who the whistle-blower is, then how does he know Vindman was being asked to out him?
This is absolutely the lynching it has been described to be. The hypocrisy of the left in this matter, their lies, their obstruction... they will be paying a terrible price for that.
And when President Trump is re-elected next year, this will have played no small role in that outcome... perhaps the biggest own-goal in political history.