Ask yourself just what it is that you are celebrating today. The impeachment of the President of The United States of America is not something to be taken lightly. The process is one that should be open, impartial and fair.

This impeachment process was none of those. For over 3 years President Trump has been investigated. As the FISA court recently noted the investigations were, in short, rigged:

"The FBI' s handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was
antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above . The frequency with which
representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by
information in their possession , and with which they withheld information detrimental to their
case...

In those three years of investigating Trump, not one statutory crime, not even a misdemeanor, could be identified. NOT ONE. Not to be dissuaded, the Democrats plowed forward. They opened "hearings." Much of that hearing process was held below ground where their Republican peers were purposefully excluded. When the Republicans dared to ask for transcripts of those secret hearings they were stonewalled. When Republicans were allowed to participate, their witnesses were not. The Republicans wanted to call eleven key witnesses. Exactly zero of those eleven were allowed.

The star witnesses the Democrats called forward could provide no direct evidence. Many were not even participants in the infamous phone call that was central to their case. The star witnesses provided testimony, most of which falls well short of any legal evidentiary standard. Frankly, most of their testimony smacks of tattling. When several of those key witnesses were asked if they could identify one impeachable offenses, they could not.

The uncomfortable fact is that the direct evidence runs counter to the Democratic narrative. Trump never explicitly tied aid to an investigation. The two parties to the agreement, Trump and Zelensky, have both said the aid wasn't tied to an investigation. The aid was released. There has been no investigation. That's what you call direct evidence...in America. We won't even touch on how it would be legally problematic for the Democrats even if the evidence clearly showed it was a quid pro quo deal.

Testimony that's tantamount to a middle schooler tattling. No direct evidence in support of their case, No specific statutory offense identified. None of the Republican witnesses allowed to testify. The actual parties to the agreement have said there was no quid pro quo. As it played out, there was in fact no quid pro quo. And when the president has had enough of this sham and exerts executive privilege, the Democrats have the unmitigated gall to accuse him of obstruction, recent history of executive privilege completely be damned.

I am going to go out on a limb here. The Democrats hold the articles. You'd think their case would be ready to move forward, they have after all voted in support of it, yet I have a hunch it will not be moved forward expeditiously. My prediction is that the house will hold it until a time that they perceive as politically advantageous. Perhaps they will time it with the release of the Barr and Durham investigative findings. The release will almost certainly be curiously timed if recent history is used as an indicator.

That's what you are celebrating in America. Just as sure as you are running your victory lap today, you will loudly protest the certain outcome when the bright light of justice, of fairness, of the rules of law and evidence and of due process are cast upon the charade by our Senate. All the while you'll remain dead silent about the injustice of our FBI running roughshod over the rights of so many. And when turn about becomes fair play, and it always does in politics, your tantrum will be surely be a sight to behold. I'll close by entering the Harry Reid nuclear option into evidence. Somber indeed.