The Mueller Dossier came out April 14, after long months of preparatory hype by the Left. It was greeted with a yawn and a "let's move on" by the public. Case closed, you might say.
In the meantime, AG Bill Barr has backed off none of his early remarks about wishing to get to the origins of the whole Russia Hoax. Alarmingly, for Dems, Barr has expressed special interest in Comey's Trump Tower meeting with the President Elect--an event with a direct tie-in to the Oval Office.
The Deep State, clearly desperate, tried to gin up--or resuscitate--anti-Trump sentiment by inducing "Bob" Mueller conduct a non-Press Conference--basically just a parting shot at Trump. Again, attempts at hyping the event--notably by John Brennan, a man with a target on his back--have been anti-climactic, except that Mueller is increasingly being exposed as a liar and a cheater.
Even worse, and as if in deliberate contrast to the absurdity of the Mueller no-questions Press Conference, Barr proceeded to give an in depth, blockbuster interview to a knowledgeable legal reporter, Jan Crawford. The interview turned out to be the legal equivalent of a carpet bombing run on the Deep State, featuring Barr quotes such as:
“So it was bogus, this whole idea that Trump was in cahoots with the Russians is bogus.”
“It’s hard to read some of the [FBI] texts and not feel that there was gross bias at work, and they’re appalling.”
“The use of foreign-intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign to me is unprecedented and it’s a serious red line that’s been crossed.”
“The media reaction is strange. Normally the media would be interested in letting the sunshine in and finding out what the truth is.”
“One of the ironies today is that people are saying that it’s President Trump that’s shredding our institutions. I really see no evidence of that. From my perspective the idea of resisting a democratically elected president and basically throwing everything at him and you know, really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president, that is where the shredding of our norms and our institutions is occurring.”
The Left/Progs in the media are in melt down mode over Barr, but the general public seems to be taking Barr's statements in stride.
That was followed with curious statements from leading House Dems, acknowledging that they can't impeach without public support--and that they don't have that support. So, Jerry Nadler, a true impeachment zealot:
“Impeachment is a political act, and you cannot impeach a president if the American people will not support it,” Nadler told WNYC. “The American people right now do not support it because they do not know the story. They don’t know the facts. We have to get the facts out. We have to hold a series of hearings, we have to hold the investigations.”
Nadler said that he hopes to bring special counsel Robert Mueller’s report “to life” by having him testify and provide some of his underlying evidence in front of a televised audience.
Right. That, after Mueller reiterated that he would NOT testify. And anyway, the notion of Mueller--variously described during his recent appearance as doddering, shifty, and nervous--bringing his dossier and impeachment fever "to life" by droning on about "underlying evidence" is the very definition of grasping at straws. By now, everyone knows that Mueller won't testify because he's afraid of opening himself up to criminal liability.
House Whip James Clyburn offered more of the same downbeat assessment:
During an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN's "State of the Union," Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House, said he believed that the Democrats would vote to impeach Trump "at some point," but that Democrats must first succeed in building a case for impeachment and selling it to the public.
He added that House Democrats are not "particularly interested in the Senate," but rather are waiting to "bring the public along.
"We do believe if we efficiently and effectively educate the public then we would have done our job and we can move on an impeachment vote," Clyburn said.
Really? The House Dems are going to "efficiently and effectively educate the public" over the summer vacation? Piece of cake. No doubt for their next trick they'll "efficiently and effectively educate the public" on the Green New Deal.
The truth is that the public has discounted Russia Hoax entirely. The Dems know that the revelations to come will be devestating for any hope of impeachment, and if the public is against it at this point that's not going to change. They Dems right now seem to be simply going through the motions, with no good options left. It's theater.
And there will surely be worse to come. If you really want to hear the sound of the impeachment window slamming shut, wait for the first significant legal action coming out in public. It could be any of a number of things. It could be Judge Sullivan tossing out the Flynn guilty plea based on prosecutorial misconduct, it could be a damning FISA abuse report from OIG, it could be an indictment. I expect something of the sort to happen this month, and when it does we can all say to the Dems: stick a fork in it. There's just no way that the public would stand for impeachment following on significant legal action of that sort.
UPDATE: Steven Hayward at Powerline has spoken with a "sage friend" who tells him that the Dems will surely impeach Trump,
because the Democrats are in deep trouble if ... investigation into the origins of the FBI “monitoring” of the Trump campaign will be highly damaging to Democrats. They’ll need an impeachment circus, even if almost certainly unsuccessful, to deflect attacks attention and muddy up the scene.
Hayward comments: "Sounds logical," and he cites the very words of James Clyburn that I quote above as proof positive.
Obviously I'm in no position to make apodictic statements about the future. Moreover, as Conrad Black recently put it, suicide can't be ruled out. Nevertheless,
1. Clyburn's claim that Trump will be impeached "at some point" must be tempered by his proviso that Democrats must first succeed in building a case for impeachment and selling it to the public. Based on available polling, the point in time that impeachment is sold to the public is unlikely to ever occur based on currently known events.
2. Like Conrad Black I find it unlikely, although not impossible, that the House Dems will choose suicide. Impeaching the POTUS against the public's will would be suicidal. Far from "deflecting attention" from Dem wrongdoing, such an approach would probably focus the attention and the ire of the public on the House Dems in the days before the election. Therefore, the better argument appears to be that Dems will step back from the cliff in the interest of self preservation.