Schiff's presumptive prosecution of impeachment fiasco

Victor Davis Hanson:

After three days of Adam Schiff’s impeachment inquiry, we are left with only the monotony. We know in advance all the questions, the subjective mood answers and bureaucratic mindset of the witnesses, the ensuing spin, and the congressional posturing.

In lieu of a Jaworski or Starr special prosecutor’s damning report, a White House tape, or even a blue dress, there is only “I assumed,” “I gathered,” “I presumed,” and “my personal belief is that” — without direct knowledge of impeachable wrongdoing or some smoking-gun email or document.

The next “star” witness, Ambassador Sondland, played perfectly the Janus consummate businessman — nodding first to Democrats, only then turning to grin at Republicans.

Sondland seemed at last to offer Schiff the chance to run out to announce to the captive press a proverbial MSNBC/CNN “bombshell.” But it was mostly a dud, with Sondland referencing a hoped-for Ukraine meeting in the White House (that never happened) for Ukrainian statements on corruption (that never happened), rather than a cutoff of U.S. military aid to Ukraine — at least according to Sondland’s “own presumption.” He even mentioned a “quid pro quo,” but that was focus grouped out to “bribery” days ago. (Sondland, like most major ambassadors, should be an expert in quid pro quos, given that it is a hallowed and bipartisan American tradition to sell off the most prestigious European ambassadorial slots to the most generous campaign donors.)

But then the cagey Sondland tacked back by reciting his phonecall question to the president, in which he asked the existential question of what Trump wanted from Ukraine — with Trump answering “Nothing!” Checkmate?

All day long, the grinning Sondland played Roadrunner to Adam Schiff’s Wiley E. Coyote, as he slowed and pulled up to offer up Trump — only to scoot away in a puff of dust as soon as Schiff tried to wrap his hands around him.

What we are left with so far are two inconvenient truths that won’t go away.

One, Trump sent lethal military aid to Ukraine and never fired any prosecutor; the Obama administration, led by Joe Biden, got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired and forbade sending lethal aid to the Ukrainians. Those facts eroded any argument that Trump endangered the Ukrainians in a way Obama had not.

In that regard, Trump did not smear Joe Biden; Joe Biden smeared Joe Biden when he bragged in front of the Council on Foreign Relations that, as tough-guy Joe, he quashed Ukrainian investigations by leveraging U.S. aid — with the sort of language that Schiff could only have hoped Trump had used:

20
I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.

Two, Lt. Col. Vindman and Adam Schiff, both on the record (the former under oath) have stated that they did not know the identity of the whistleblower — the font of the entire impeachment inquiry.

Yet when asked for the identity of the second person to whom Vindman (possibly illegally) had leaked a classified presidential call, Vindman refused to answer — with Schiff jumping in to state that neither was going to reveal the whistleblower’s identify.

That was a circumlocutional admission that they both probably had lied and of course knew who the whistleblower was — contradicting their prior testimonies.

Otherwise, neither would have worried about identifying this second anonymous recipient of Vindman’s leak, though Vindman had eagerly revealed the other leak receiver as George Kent.

All this is unsustainable.

If Trump is impeached, the Senate will call in Leaker X and he will be forced to testify under oath about many things, but especially about who prepped him on the presidential phone call, and what exactly his relationship was with Vindman, Schiff, and his staff. The resulting ball of collusion could be explosive.
...

There is more.

The Schiff show is not changing Republican's minds, but it is changing the minds of voters who now disagree with his push for impeachment.  This clunker is so obviously unfair in the evidence Schiff allows that those who might support it are in danger of losing their seats in Congress.