As the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump comes to a close, resisting Democrats are having a hard time coming to grips with an impending acquittal.
Perturbed members of the opposition party have now chosen to engage in a smear campaign one characterizing the Senate proceedings as illegitimate.
Employing a worn-out playbook from past attacks, some of the more spiteful Democrats are trying to massage the minds of a would-be unsuspecting public that the acquittal of President Trump somehow lacks legitimacy because of a purported deficiency of witnesses or documents.
In a Jan. 17, 2020 appearance on HBO's "Real Time With Bill Maher," U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "You are impeached forever," punctuating her comment with the line, "No matter what the Senate does, it [impeachment] can never be erased."
On Jan. 30, 2020, the day before the Senate voted against subpoenaing additional witnesses or documents, Pelosi told a reporter, "You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that."
The very next morning, which was also prior to the pivotal Senate vote, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. declared, "The president’s acquittal will be meaningless, because it will be the result of a sham trial.
"If there are no witnesses, no documents in this trial, there will be a permanent asterisk next to the acquittal of President Trump written in permanent ink."
Other Democrats joined in with the spin, as did most of their willing media accomplices.
Many will recall when the Democrats flooded the media with a similar set of talking points at the conclusion of the confirmation process for then-U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Some of the more spiteful Democrats contended that the process would be unfair and tainted if there was not a delay for an FBI investigation.
After the president and the GOP relented to a week-long FBI investigation, certain Democratic office-holders ran to the microphones to assert that the investigation was insufficient and the confirmation process flawed.
Once again, it really would not have mattered how the GOP senators had proceeded with the impeachment trial. If the trial did not match the outcome that the removal-oriented Democrats wanted, they would have followed up with a coordinated negative message anyway.
The Constitution grants the Senate the sole power to try all impeachments.
The House speaker has no real role in an impeachment trial. However, as Pelosi did when she conditioned the delivery of the Articles of Impeachment, the House speaker is attempting to exercise influence, while exerting control over Senate impeachment functions.
In stark contrast to the way in which the House hearings unfolded, the Senate conducted the impeachment trial process in a fair and dignified manner. While carrying out its constitutional duty, the Senate received and considered a record produced by the House of Representatives.
Seventeen of the 18 witnesses from whom the House obtained testimony had their transcripts released. Noticeably absent was the transcript of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who gave testimony that is widely believed would have been helpful to the president’s case.
During the Senate trial, members of the Senate, acting as a jury, listened to more than 190 portions of testimony from 13 of the House witnesses.
Additionally they had access to almost 29,000 documents.
It was the House Democrats who made the decision to disallow any witnesses supporting the president’s case. It was also the House Democrats who chose not to subpoena other witnesses, because they apparently did not wish to take the time to allow the judicial branch to do its job; that is, the job of dealing with the important constitutional issue of executive privilege.
Some of the more spiteful Dems seem to enjoy projecting the image of wrapping themselves in the Constitution, while slicing it to ribbons with deceitful words and duplicitous conduct.
James Hirsen, J.D., M.A., in media psychology, is a New York Times best-selling author, media analyst, and law professor. Visit Newsmax TV Hollywood.Read more reports from James Hirsen — Click Here Now.
© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.