Why Trump Should Be Impeached

Don Surber makes the case for impeaching Trump, as part of a much longer blog. His case is one we've discussed here previously, and he presents it well:

I want President Trump impeached because it would give him a very public stage -- unfiltered by the media -- to lay out who the swamp is, what it has gotten away with, and why it is trying to kill his presidency. 

An impeachment would allow President Trump to defend himself. He can subpoena Hunter Biden as a hostile witness and ask him about his Burisma job. I would ask him to answer in Ukrainian. 

President Trump also can force Daddy Biden to testify. Just what did he mean by "I said, nah, I’m not going to — or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said — I said, call him." 

Put Obama on the stand. Ask him about Biden's boast. Was it true? Then ask him why he kept sending Biden to Ukraine. 

Put on the stand the "whistle blower," which is the code name for the CIA spy Democrats embedded in the Trump administration. 

To be sure there would be plenty of Fifth Amendment refusals to reply. The public sees that as an admission of guilt. 

It is. 

Democrats do not have to prove anything to impeach the president.

But once they do, they turn the Senate into a courtroom in which President Trump is unlimited in defending himself. I want him to put on the stand Biden, Hunter, Kerry, his stepson, Whitey Bulger's nephew, and 100 other Democrats -- and grill them like the cheap steaks and little weenies they are. 

And then I want President Trump to take the stand. He will blow them away.
Calling out the accusers just may be part of the Republican strategy. 

...

The media thinks Americans are idiots who will shun President Trump upon impeachment. The media thinks it can ignore basic facts such as Biden's corruption with impunity. The media also thinks the public is not on to their irrational paraphrases and ... cherry picking ... of quotes ... out of context. 

Finally, the media thinks impeachment is the last act of this farce. It should be only the beginning. 

Democrats are banking on President Trump wanting to get this impeachment over with quickly. 

Why?

Zerohedge makes a similar case, quoting a Washington Times article that cites the views of at least two leading legal authorities on impeachment:

Former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter could be forced to testify if the Senate moves to hold an impeachment trial of President Trump, according to the Washington Times, citing congressional aides "who questioned whether Democrats have thought through the full implications of their impeachment drive." 

... 

For that matter, if the House chooses to impeach Mr. Trump on charges stemming from the special counsel’s Russia investigation, aides said it could open the door to witnesses such as fired FBI Agent Peter Strzok or even major figures from the Obama administration. 

...

If the House votes to impeach - a step which Speaker Nancy Pelosi hasn't committed to yet, then it would move to the Senate for a formal trial in which a 2/3 majority would be required to convict and formally remove President Trump.

They would also get to force the whistleblowers accusing Trump of improper behavior to testify publicly, according to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.  

Graham also suggested that House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-CA) could become a witness in any impeachment trial for hiding his office's interactions with one of the whistleblowers. 

"I don’t think the Dems have thought this through at all," one staffer told the Times - which notes that the GOP-dominated Senate would have "full control over what an impeachment trial would look like." 

According to George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, a Senate trial would largely be defined by what articles the House passes.  

"If Trump is impeached on the Ukrainian call, the Bidens would be fair game, particularly Hunter," said Turley. 

... 

According to Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), if the House does impeach Trump, the Senate will be forced to take the matter up, saying "The way that impeachment stops is a Senate majority with me as majority leader."  

That said, the Examiner suggests that Senate GOP might "allow a spectacle to embarrass Democrats" with how things go.  

"Democrats could object, but they’re in the minority and there’s not a lot they can do about that," said impeachment expert Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina and author of "Impeachment: What Everyone Needs to Know."

Of course there's one very big reason why both parties might want to step back from this cliff: Donald J. Trump--the most innocent man in Washington. He's already been investigated "six ways from Sunday" by the media industrial Deep State complex, so we now he's totally clean. But his interests are not the same as the interests of the Legislative Branch. If the Dems insist on going down this road, no doubt the GOP will reciprocate. However ...

Earlier this morning I quoted a Fox story re Adam Schiff's connections to Ukrainian arms dealer Igor Pasternak. Their relationship is very obviously corrupt by reasonable--which is to say, non-DC--standards. But the story contained a very telling sentence:

An online search of donor records shows that Pasternak has donated money to politicians and organizations of both parties.

Turning an impeachment trial into a showcase for Congressional corruption would be very much in Trump's interests--not so much in Congressional interests.