Impeachment Theater: What It's About

I have in the past spoken repeatedly about "Impeachment Theater." The point is simply that theater mimics life, but it's not real and everyone knows that. Theater, in the usual sense, doesn't change anything in the real world. Impeachment Theater is mimicing real life but, like theater, it's not real. Not in the usual sense.

Impeachment Theater is taking place in the field of action in the real world, and its intent is precisely to change that real world. The point of the deception is to gain acceptance for that change in the real world of public opinion.

The goal, as we've been discussing during the past few weeks, has to do with political legitimacy. The Dem contention is that there is only one legitimate political party--theirs. And yet, at this moment, a different group claiming to be a legitimate political party controls the Senate and the White House. The Dem goal is, through Impeachment Theater, to delegitimate that rival grouping, seize control of the Branches of government, acquire power and never relinquish it. A One Party state, leading George Soros' "Open Society," is the end goal. If Trump should be successfully removed after an Impeachment Theater show trial, make no mistake about it--more show trials would follow, starting with Brett Kavanaugh. A compliant media would egg on the howling Leftist mob.

One step at a time, however. Right now the proximate goal for the Dems must be survival in the face of the existential threat that Trump poses through the Barr/Durham investigations.

Let's look at how this Impeachment Theater works.


Setting The Stage - As soon as the Dems gained control of the House they set the stage by changing the rules. The House may look like a representative institution of the People, to outward appearances, but Pelosi's rule changes have altered that former reality. The House has become--to the extent that rules changes can accomplish this--the stage for radical Dem theater.

The Non Impeachment Inquiry - A real impeachment inquiry would require participation by the whole House. Politically, that was a non starter, due to lack of Dem consensus. But the rules changes made possible a Non Impeachment Inquiry--an impeachment inquiry in name, but one that would be unconstrained by normal House rules. As such it has no real constitutional standing but the compliant media can speak of it as if it is in fact a constitutional reality. You only need to fool most of the people this one time to get the ball rolling downhill.

Non Witnesses - An inquiry needs witnesses, but a non inquiry can make do with non witnesses. Call them "whistleblowers." It doesn't matter that they're not actual whistleblowers, as long as the media surrogates keep repeating the lies. We're told that "whistleblowers" are "coming forward." But where are they? They haven't come forward into the light of day--they're being kept hidden so far. Non inquiry, non witnesses.

Non Subpoenas - The point of non witnesses is simply to gin up support for document demands to paralyze the opposition. In a non inquiry that can be done through non subpoenas--letters that claim to be subpoenas but aren't. Their lack of enforceability, again, is not the point. We have seen repeatedly the Deep State's use of media accounts in place of actual evidence. The point is, as usual, to enable a media hue and cry: in this case, "obstruction," "coverup"! Trump thwarted this tactic the first time by--against all expectations--releasing the Ukraine call transcript. The Dem tactic is to keep trying--sooner or later Trump will have to draw the line.

If these tactics succeed the stage would be set to move from mere theater to real world action: Impeachment and a Senate trial. The hope would be to once more bully the GOP into acquiescence. Or failing that, extend the "obstruction" and "coverup" narrative to the entire 2020 elections.

In other words, this is an attempt at a Watergate Redux. There are problems ahead, however.

The first is that the Republicans have, in the succeeding decades, learned a few things. No, really! Think Clarence Thomas. Think Brett Kavananaugh. Moreover, the GOP controls the Senate, has a first class Senate leader in Mitch McConnell, and has a cadre of Senators that grew up in the post Watergate decades and is more inclined to take a stand. McConnell has shown a willingness to take a stand and exert his leadership muscle when necessary, judiciously using his leverage.

Another factor that could cause a Senate trial to be very much an uphill struggle--more so even than would naturally be expected--for the House Dems can be found in institutional differences. The Senate, including many Dem Senatores, is unlikely, as an institution, to cede this degree of power to the House.

That McConnell has been thinking ahead is apparent. Months ago he stated that impeachment would lead to a trial immediately. There would be no delay. This morning we are hearing that he appears to have taken the measure of what's going on. His current thinking may be to quickly swat any impeachment aside:

In the brief Facebook video, McConnell makes it clear that the Republican-controlled Senate with him in charge will be a firewall against efforts to remove Trump from office. 

“All of you know your Constitution,” McConnell says in the video. “The way that impeachment stops is with a Senate majority with me as majority leader.” 

...

“It’s a Senate rule related to impeachment, it would take 67 votes to change, so I would have no choice but to take it up,” McConnell said recently on CNBC. “How long you’re on it is a whole different matter.”

That's a clear statement that McConnell will use his majority to set the rules for the trial to favor the result he wants. Right now he believes it's in the GOP's interest to dispose of it quickly. However, that could change--depending on what transpires with the various DoJ investigations that appear to be developing rapidly. A long, thorough, trial could have advantages, and McConnell will control that. In any event, Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler will not be able to bully McConnell, who will fight fiercely for the good of the party. He has surely learned from Watergate and knows that no good will come from abandoning the White House. He also knows that popular Republican support for Trump is very much on his side.

A second  difficulty for Dems is that the media playing field is vastly different from Watergate days. Even with the bias of big tech, new conservative initiatives continue to develop and get the messaging out.

A third difficulty is Trump himself. Not only is he a communicator like no other recent president--one who understands persuasion like no other--but he's also a fighter unlike any recent president. The Dems simply have no one to compare in terms of getting his message out. The attempt to use Schumer and Pelosi in that role fell notably flat. The notion of bringing Lizzie Warren back from the campaign trail is a non starter for multiple reasons, and Biden, too, is out of the question. Lack of a credible public face will not easily be overcome, even with the MSM in the Dem corner.

Finally, there is the Bill Barr factor--with his prosecutorial bulldog John Durham at his side. In Bill Barr, Trump has an Attorney General who is both a first class litigator in his own right but one who is deeply dedicated to the defense of the constitutional status of the Executive Branch. He lived through and fought in earlier wars of this sort. He got back into harness knowing full well what the stakes were and is unintimidate by any of the legal flacks that the Dems bring forward. Count on these three things regarding Barr:

1) Barr's investigation into the origins of the Russia Hoax have produced significant results--the notes of panic in Dem messaging make that clear. Knowing what he knows and seeing the reaction his investigation has produced, Barr will be more determined than ever to push through to a definitive conclusion. 

2) In the current state of affairs, Barr is looking into ways to use the results he has obtained even before any trials. His past experience in the 80's and 90's have left him in no doubt--he knows this is as much a political as a legal battle. He knows that losing the political battle could prevent him from getting to the legal battle that could provide the crowning triumph. 

3) Barr is certainly looking into ways to reassert control over the Intelligence Community. Indeed, it is likely his won investigative aggressiveness that has alarmed the IC and led to this Impeachment Theater coup attempt, originating in the CIA.

Just yesterday I wrote The State Of Play? Advantage Trump. That's still my position, but be prepared for a hard slog. All that the Left has fought for since the days of Woodrow Wilson is at stake for them. They are playing for keeps and they mean to dominate America.