The Democrats, who now that I think about it, lie about everything, will tell you that President Trump must be impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.  Of course, they’re lying.  It’s not about the President’s legitimate exercise of his executive authority, which isn’t an impeachable act.  It’s not about the President’s refusal to abdicate his duty by permitting the Legislative Branch to violate the separation of powers, which also isn’t impeachable.  It’s not about a phone call, or Ukraine, or aid money, or the delay of it, or quid or quo or pro.  At the end of the day, it’s not even really about Joe Biden and Son’s crooked deals.  It’s a mutiny.  Not a mutiny on the Bounty, or on some other ship.  It’s a mutiny on the 7th Floor of the State Department.  The 7th Floor of the Department of State houses the top level bureaucratic swamp creatures, also known as the Deep State, or the Shadow State, or as they were known during the Obama/Hillary days, “the Elite.”  They actually are just one branch of the Deep State, another existing in the Intelligence community (more about that later).  The 7th Floor dwellers are career diplomats who stay in office decade after decade, watching presidents come and go.  These are the creatures who are under the impression that it is they, and not the President, who decide on America’s foreign policy.  They are holdovers from Administrations past who exist to frustrate the new Administration.  Why not just get rid of these obstructive folks?  President Trump tried.  Remember Secretary of State Rex Tillerson? Less than a month into the Trump Administration, Tillerson fired most of Hillary’s rogue Shadow Government. The Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources and the Counselor officers, all were fired.  This is the crew that purged the Department of all the documents linking Hillary to the Benghazi scandal.  Problem was Tillerson didn’t get them all.  And it was the remnants of the 7th Floor Elites who prepared “talking points” for President Trump to follow during his call to Ukrainian President Zelinsky.  And these are the people who were shocked, shocked, when President Trump didn’t do what he was told.  The nerve of Trump, huh?  Who does he think he is?  After all, they’re the experts, and he’s just a lowly president.  Plus, what’s all this crap about investigating Washington politicians who sell their offices to foreigners so their relatives can get paid for doing nothing?  Why, that’s American as apple pie.  Trump wants to close that piggy bank?  Not on our watch (which never ends).  To paraphrase Paddy Chayefsky’s Network, “You have meddled with the primal forces of nature Mr. Trump, and now you must atone!”  Donald Trump wouldn’t play ball, so he had to go.  The Ukraine call wasn’t the last straw, it was just the latest straw.  The Deep State began trying to keep Trump from being elected in 2015.  They’ve been trying to impeach Trump since January 2017.  How have they tried to screw Trump?  Let me count the ways.  They recruited Ukranian help to get dirt on Paul Manafort.  They used Brits, Russians, Italians, Australians, Maltese and other foreigners to set up George Papadopolous and Carter Page, smearing Trump in the phony Russian collusion scam.  They used the FBI and CIA to corrupt the FISA court and to frame General Flynn.  Then there were Michael Cohen, and Avennatti, and strippers.  And let’s not forget Bob Mueller.  None of that worked, so on to Ukraine.  One of the most active participants in the “get rid of Trump” campaign just happens to be Eric Ciaramella, the so-called “whistleblower,” who started the whole “Trump’s Ukraine call was impeachable” bullshit.  Eric Ciaramella is a CIA analyst and former National Security Council staffer.  Ciaramella has multiple connections to election interference by Ukraine in 2016.  He has close ties to Alexandria Chalupa, who led Ukrainian efforts to help Hillary in 2016. Ciaramella was with Vice President Joe Biden on trips to Ukraine.  Two aides to Adam Schiff (for brains), Abigail Grace and Sean Misko, worked with Ciaramella in the White House.  Small world right?  I guess it’s just a coincidence that Ciaramella wound up at the center of the Ukraine phone call flap.  Uh huh.  Ciaramella worked for Susan Rice, who unmasked dozens of American citizens so that they could be illegally spied on, and who wrote a transparent CYA Memo on January 20, 2017, to cover Il Duce Obama’s bony ass (The President told us, “Do it by the book”).  Just a coincidence.  He also worked closely with Joe Biden.  Just a coincidence. Barely two weeks after Donald Trump took office, Ciaramella, then working at the White House, was overheard discussing with another staffer how to remove the newly elected president from office.  Just a coincidence. Then in May 2017, Ciaramella went “outside his chain of command,” to send an email alerting another agency that Trump happened to hold a meeting with Russian diplomats in the Oval Office the day after firing Comey, and disclosed that Russian President Vladimir Putin had phoned the President a week earlier.  That led to Ciaramella’s transfer from the White House, back to CIA headquarters.  When he was disclosed as the whistleblower, Ciaramella hired attorney Mark Zaid.  In July 2017, Zaid predicted a “coup” against President Trump and promised to “get rid of him” — saying in a statement that his tweets referred to “a completely lawful process.” Zaid tweeted, “We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters.”  Again, just a coincidence, right?  Highly unlikely.  The impeachment trial now ongoing is just the latest salvo in the “remove Trump” campaign.  Schiff and his aides Grace and Misko are connected to Ciaramella.  That’s why Schiff wouldn’t let Ciaramella testify.  And that’s why Schiff refused to answer questions about the Ciaramella-Misko connection at the trial.  Ciaramella discussed getting rid of Trump with them 2 years ago.  So none of what’s going on now is coincidental.   It’s a mutiny and a coup de etat.  These bastards will stop at nothing.

The impeachment trial of President Trump began on January 21st.  As this is written, after the first 12 hours of proceedings, there is in the air what Tennessee Williams would call “a powerful and obnoxious odor.”  They say that a picture is worth a thousand words.  This picture neatly summarizes the substance of the Democrat arguments in the Senate.   Surprising no one, the most obnoxious offender was Adam Schiff (for brains).  When reviewing the words of Schiff, it is necessary to separate what he says from what actually happened.  Again one picture says it best –

That’s right, you need to tell the shit from Shinola.  Giving the delusional bastard his due, it must be noted that Schiff acts like he really believes the crap he says.  More’s the pity.  Schiff told the Senate the evidence against the president is overwhelming.  He then told them that, unless the Senate lets him go out and look for more evidence to prove his case, the trial is unfair.  Schiff also lied (again) about the so-called new evidence.  That great legal scholar Jerry Nadler actually warned that unless Democrats are permitted to seek out more evidence to win their “overwhelming and undisputed case” the Senators would be guilty of a coverup.  Put aside for a moment the fact that reopening the investigation during the trial is absolutely unconstitutional, and ask yourself this question.  In a sane world where logic prevails, why would a prosecutor with an overwhelming case need to look for any more evidence?  The case should have been dismissed right there, but this farce went on from 1 p.m. till after midnight, with needless procedural vote after needless procedural vote.  The Senate rules for the trial provided the Democrats 2 days to argue their case.  Mitch McConnell further accommodated the Dems by giving them an additional day to show the Senate what they’ve got.  Then, after the President’s counsel presents the defense, there will be a vote on whether to hear from witnesses.  In other words, the detestable Chuck Schumer didn’t have to waste 10 hours attempting to get permission to subpoena witnesses and documents that the House of Representatives neglected to pursue.  The rules were sensible.  Now, for my money, the House should be limited to arguing its case based solely on what is included in the four corners of the impeachment articles they brought.  In other words, their case should be limited to the evidence they relied on in voting the articles.  This is in accordance with due process of law.  You shouldn’t be dragged into court on one set of evidence, and then be required to defend against something else.  But McConnell gave Democrats more leeway.  To appease the shaky or downright mutinous Republican Senators (Romney, Collins, Murkowski, Gardner), he has allowed a vote on witnesses.  Schumer couldn’t wait, however, because what’s going on in the Senate is not really a trial.  It’s a show.  And given the performers involved, it’s a Schumer-Schiff show.  They know they can’t prove their case because they have no case, and it’s not really about proving anything, it’s about inflicting as much damage on the President as possible to weaken him in the upcoming election.  The monumental hypocrisy of Chuck Schumer is no better exposed than in reviewing his remarks at the 1999 Clinton impeachment trial.  Keep in mind that Bill Clinton was implicated in 11 criminal violations, and that the House has alleged no violation of any law by President Trump.  Here’s what Chucky said in 1999.  “We stand at the brink of removing a president – not because of a popular groundswell to remove him and not because of the the magnitude of the wrongs he’s committed – but because (of) … a small group of people who hate [him] and hate his policies.”  “If you had asked me one year ago if people like this with such obvious political motives could use our courts, play the media and tantalize the legislative branch to achieve their ends of bringing down the president, I would have said ‘not a chance – that doesn’t happen in America.'”  “It seems we have lost the ability to forcefully advocate for our position without trying to criminalize or at least dishonor our adversaries.”  “If the cycle of political recrimination and the scandalizing continues, the American people will become more alienated and cynical and shaken by the political process and they too, will lose faith in the great instrument the Founding Fathers have given us.”  “Let’s shake hands and say we are now going to forego bringing down people for political gain.”  Everything Chuck Schumer said and predicted in 1999 has come to pass.  If he had one ounce of integrity, or even the slightest degree of intellectual honesty, he wouldn’t be doing what he’s doing now.  He doesn’t.  The Democrats have no choice but to keep telling their lies.  Have you seen their 2020 presidential candidates?  It’s all they’ve got.  What they say doesn’t have to be true.  It doesn’t even have to make sense legally.  They want to call witnesses and demand documents subject to executive privilege.  Schiff argued that the President really didn’t raise executive privilege during the House investigation.  What really happened is that the House withdrew the subpoenas and decided not to contest privilege in the courts.  The Dems actually told the Senate, and the Chief Justice of the United States that the courts have no place in the process.  Bull Schiff!  If a House subpoena can be challenged on grounds of privilege, a Senate subpoena can be challenged on the same ground.  In other words, the Senate cannot compel John Bolton or the President’s chief of staff to testify anymore than the House could.  The Dems know it.  They just what to make it appear that the President is hiding something.  It’s a sham, and the Senate shouldn’t stand for it.  My advice is, the Senate should politely hear everything the Democrats have to say, and then ask Schiff what a Superior Court Judge once asked one of my adversaries, “Yeah, but that’s bullshit, right?”  Case dismissed!

So, Nancy Pelosi finally pulled the trigger on impeachment.  After rushing the impeachment articles through the House in December (because President Trump is “an existential threat to our democracy”), Pelosi delayed the appointment of impeachment managers to transmit the articles to the Senate for some three weeks.  All that time, Pelosi and her repulsive henchmen have tried to force the Senate to continue in the impeachment trial, the shameful kangaroo court procedures used in the House.  The Constitution clearly delineates the duties of the Congress in impeachments.  The House has “the sole power” of impeachment for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.  The Senate has “the sole power” to try impeachments.  The Framers spent considerable time wrangling over impeachment.  George Mason suggested that an official could be impeached for “maladministration.”  The Framers rejected that as being too broad.  The fear was such language would turn impeachments into votes of no confidence whenever the Legislature disagreed with a president’s actions.  Sound familiar?  In Federalist 65,  Alexander Hamilton, writing as “Publius,” wrote that impeachment should result from “those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”  Nancy Pelosi and company have already violated this principle, impeaching the President for “abuse of power.”  That’s not the same thing as abuse or violation of the public trust.  In other words, the mere exercise of a constitutionally authorized power cannot be an abuse or violation of the public trust because the Constitution demands that the President take such actions.  One such power that the Constitution invests in the President is that “he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”  This duty necessarily includes taking actions necessary to see to it that those who may have violated the law, whether in this country, or for instance, in Ukraine, are brought to justice.  Logically, an abuse or violation of the public trust must stem criminal activity or from some action by a President which is outside his constitutional authority.  Think of Il Duce Obama, “I have a pen and a phone.”  There is nothing like that in this case.  The Senate is invested with the sole power to “try” impeachments.  We hear a lot of talk on TV about the “trial in the Senate,” and about the President “being convicted.”  At first blush, one might get the impression that the impeachment trial is just like any other trial in a court; but it’s not.  The Constitution provides that the Chief Justice of the United States shall preside when a president is impeached.  However, the Chief Justice presiding over an impeachment trial does not have the same authority to control the proceedings as does a judge in court.  Chief Justice Rehnquist said it best after the Clinton impeachment trial, “My job was to do nothing, and I did it very well.”  What that means is that the Senate is in charge of the proceedings.  Senators can ask the Chief Justice to rule, but the Senate can vote to change any rulings he makes.  Chief Justice Rehnquist did a bit more than “nothing” in 1999.  He did make an important ruling that clarified the roles of the Senators, sustaining Senator Harkin’s objection to the Senators being referred to as “jurors.”  In a court trial, the judge is the judge of the law and the jurors are the judges o the facts.  Not so in impeachment.  Rehnquist ruled that the Senate is not simply a jury, it is a court.  Senators are judges of both law and fact.  Thus, it is the Senate itself that decides on the procedures and makes the final decision.  Rehnquist’s ruling in the Clinton impeachment derived from an opinion he wrote in 1993 in Nixon v. United States.  No, not the Nixon you’re thinking of, Judge Walter Nixon, who was impeached for bribery.  Judge Nixon objected to the Senate’s appointment of a committee to hear evidence, and he wanted the Court to review the procedure.  Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, said no.   The Court upheld the Senate’s right to determine its own procedures, including the use of a trial committee.  In other words, the Senate makes its own rules.  And the Court ruled that the decision of the Senate may not be reviewed by any court because the Senate has “sole” power.  Senate Rule XI permits a committee of the Senate to take testimony and receive evidence.  Senators are permitted to ask questions.  Mere jurors can’t do that.  The Court made clear that an impeachment trial is  not the same as a criminal trial.  The Framers chose the Senate to try impeachments instead of the courts, because when an official is removed from office, the courts must try the criminal charges that caused the impeachment.  This kind of suggests that no president should be impeached for anything less than a crime of some kind.  The House alleges no criminal conduct by President Trump.  Indeed, until now, no president has been impeached for conduct that was not either a crime or a violation of an Act of Congress.  But there’s more.  Justice Rehnquist wrote that giving separate functions to the House and Senate “avoids making the same people both accusers and judges and guards against the danger of persecution from the prevalency of a factious spirit in either of those branches.”  The House has accused President Trump of impeachable acts.  The repulsive Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff (for brains), by demanding that the Senate seek out new evidence has perverted the process envisioned by the Framers.  To say nothing of the fact that the articles of impeachment are nothing more than a persecution derived from the prevalency of a factious spirit in the super-partisan House of Representatives, that passed the articles without even one Republican vote.   Hopefully, the Senate majority will see these articles for the sham that they clearly are, hopefully the Senate Republicans will act to preserve the Constitution, and not to pervert it, and will deliver the President a swift acquittal.

Alright, enough is enough.  I’m talking to you loony leftists, now.  You had your fun.  You indulged your fantasies.  Your let your Trump Derangement Syndrome fever dreams run rampant.  But now, it’s time to return to reality.  You were all set for Hillary to be president.  I get that.  You didn’t take Donald Trump’s candidacy seriously.  Most people didn’t.  I get that.  You were shocked when he won in 2016.  I get that.  You can’t accept Trump as our president, and you can’t wait for the next election when you can vote against him.  I get that too.  You oppose every program that Trump supports, even when advancing it would benefit the country in general and Democrats in particular.  Strangely, even that I understand, and it doesn’t bother me much, because refusing to do your jobs hurts your Party more than it hurts the president.  But now, you’ve gone over the edge.  We used to have a saying, “Politics stops at the water’s edge.”  What it meant was that, we can argue and fight about tax policy, welfare and any other domestic program you care to name as much as we want, but when national security is at issue, there are no Democrats or Republicans, only Americans.  Politics stopped at the water’s edge, not due to the wisdom of our leaders.  It stopped because rational people from both Parties understood that foreign threats to our national security present a clear and present danger, and that meeting them must be above humdrum partisan bickering.  No, I’m not ascribing some high-minded, selfless qualities to our politicians.  It’s just the opposite.  Politics stopped at the water’s edge for a very selfish reason.  If a foreign enemy defeated America, the politicians would lose their meal ticket.  They had to cooperate so that they could protect their phony baloney jobs – Harumph!  This week, the loony Trump-hating Democrats have gone a step too far, even for them.  So blinded are they with hatred for our president, so intent are they to oppose his every word and deed, that the Democrats, and their media lap dogs, have chosen to support a foreign nation rather than Trump.   And not just any foreign nation, Iran.  The country that stormed our embassy in 1979, and took our diplomats hostage.  The country that is marked by mobs of people marching in the streets  chanting, “Death to America!”  The country that has been supplying  terrorists with explosives that have killed and maimed thousands of American soldiers.  Iran is the country that Il Duce Obama bribed with $150 billion and additional pallets of cash.  Iran took the money, spit in our eye, and stopped chanting, “Death to America!” only long enough to burn some American flags.  They carried out terrorist attacks all over the globe.  Iran’s chief terrorist was General Qasem Soleimani.  He personally killed over 600 American troops, and untold thousands of others in and outside of Iran.  Most recently, Soleimani was responsible for attacks on a U.S. drone, on a base in Iraq which killed an American contractor, and a two day long attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.  That was the last straw for President Trump.  Soleimani brazenly took a commercial airline flight to Baghdad on January 2nd.  A U.S. Predator drone and Apache helicopters were waiting for him.  Soleimani got off the plane and into a car.  Several Hellfire missiles later, Soleimani, or at least various parts of him, arrived in Hell, rang the bell and asked, “Where are my 72 virgins?” (Or was that raisins?)   Iran’s Supreme Leader, Khamenei, was furious, “Martyr Soleimani is an International figure of Resistance & all such people will seek revenge.  All friends—& enemies—know that Jihad of Resistance will continue with more motivation & definite victory awaits the fighters on this blessed path.”  Not surprising.  Consider the source.  But what was that about “the Resistance?” Isn’t that what the Dems call themselves?  Democrat politicians and the media picked up where Khamenei left off.  Joe Biden said “the strike (on Soleimani) was a “hugely escalatory move in an already dangerous region.”  Bernie Sanders said the killing of Soleimani “puts us on the path” toward another war.   Elizabeth Warren said the strike was “reckless” and it escalated tensions with Iran.  Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff  (for brains) complained that Congress hadn’t been consulted before the strike.  Former Obama National Security Advisor, and well-known liar, Susan Rice, claimed the Obama administration never had the opportunity to take out Soleimani, but said that Team Obama probably wouldn’t have killed him anyway since the risks outweighed the benefits.  Uh huh.  Obama staffer Ben Rhodes really got his panties in a twist, warning that the death of Soleimani was “a frightening moment” that could lead to war.  Yeah.  Nothing succeeded like Obama’s appeasement policies, right?  The Washington Post called mass murderer Soleimani, “A revered military leader.”  Richard Engel of NBC no less (and there is no less)  claimed the U.S. turned Soleimani “into a martyr, if not a saint.”  Mr. Engel, saints do good, not evil.  And there’s one thing all martyrs have in common,  all of them are dead.  Good.  General Petraeus said Soleimani was more dangerous than Bin Laden.  Normal Americans welcomed the death of the terrorist.  Democrats gave aid and comfort to the enemy.  Demonstrating their ability to lie about all sides of any issue, they hailed the attack on the Baghdad embassy as “Trump’s Benghazi.”  When, unlike Obama, Trump took immediate action and ended the threat, by sending in troops and whacking Soleimani, the feckless Dems accused Trump of starting a war.  The House passed a useless War Powers resolution curbing presidential power.  It’s meaningless, and unconstitutional.  They don’t care.  They’re sick and getting sicker.  Case in point.  Chris Matthews of MSNBC actually compared the death of mass murderer, torturer Soleimani to the deaths of Elvis and Princess Diana, calling him “a beloved figure.”  Democrat delusions on domestic issues are one thing,  but when they openly support one of our worst foreign enemies, they can’t be tolerated.  The only thing that will curb the mad-dog leftists is a massive defeat in November.

Many years ago, when Saturday Night Live was funny, the late Gilda Radner portrayed a character known as Emily Litella.  A confused Emily would appear on the newscast to bemoan such issues as “natural racehorses” (resources), “violins on television” (violence)  or “Soviet jewelry” (jewry).  When her misunderstandings were corrected, Emily would smile into the camera and proclaim, “Never mind.”  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s performance in the impeachment farce has been a creditable impersonation of Emily Litella.  Remember the Democrats excuses for their rush to impeachment.  Like everything else today’s Democrats do and say it was a tissue of lies.  We were told that Donald Trump represented an existential threat to our democracy, that he had to be removed immediately because he was mentally unbalanced and unfit for office, and that the nature and extent of his corruption was such that there was no time to waste.  They were sorry about it, they said.  They didn’t want to do it, but they had no choice.  Trump had to go and there was no time to waste.  Time was of such an essence that normal legal procedures could not be followed.  Democrats subpoenaed top members of the President’s national security and White House staffs and demanded internal documents, all of which were subject to claims of executive privilege.  Executive privilege isn’t a joke or some nefarious means of avoiding the law, it is the law.  Every president, back to George Washington has invoked executive privilege to maintain the separation of powers guaranteed by the Constitution.  Remember the Constitution?  It’s the document that even Democrats swear to uphold and defend.  It’s the document they hide behind when it suits them, and ignore, ridicule and lie about when that fits their agenda.  The Constitution established three branches of government, each with separate functions and powers, and each of which must be free to operate without undue interference from another branch.  The separation of powers prevents one branch of the government from improperly intruding on the workings of another branch.  The branches are separate, but don’t occupy water-tight compartments.  Congress may oversee the operations of the various executive agencies and departments because it funds them, but it can’t exercise such control that it usurps the function of the Executive.  When the Congress seeks information from the Executive which it believes it has a right to get, and which the Executive believes is protected by privilege, there is one and only one time-honored, not to mention legal, remedy available.  The Article I branch (the Congress) and the Article II branch (the Executive) bring their dispute before the Article III branch of the government, the Judiciary.  You go to court.  Which is what the Trump Administration officials did when the subpoenas were issued.  They took the case to court.  That’s what happened in 1973 when President Nixon’s White House tapes were subpoenaed by Congress.  The Supreme Court unanimously, including three Nixon appointees, ordered the tapes turned over to Congress.   The Executive complied with the court order.  That’s how it works.  You might even say that going outside the procedure I just described is what represents the existential threat to the Constitution and to our republic.  But that’s just what the Democrats in Congress decided to do.  Nancy Pelosi announced that they couldn’t go to the trouble of following the law by letting the courts decide the dispute.  That would take too much time and the Democrats just couldn’t wait.  There was a constitutional crisis, and it was imperative that Trump be removed from office immediately.  In other words, to save the Constitution, we must ignore the Constitution.  The only way to save our form of government was to violate every rule and deny every right guaranteed by the Constitution.  That’s why the Democrats moved so swiftly to impeach.  That’s why they denied the President the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses against him, the right to call witnesses and the right to present evidence of his own.  That’s why Adam Schiff (for brains) prevented Republican Committee members from asking questions and calling witnesses.  That’s why Nadler and Pelosi rammed the impeachment vote through so fast.  It had to be done before Christmas.  Why?  Nancy claimed it was because Donald Trump was so great a threat that they couldn’t delay.  Nancy Pelosi, who at the beginning of 2019 told us that you can’t impeach without a bipartisan consensus that removal of a President was necessary, ended 2019 with an impeachment vote that included zero Republican votes and which three Democrats voted against.  No time to lose, it had to be done now.  They started the “impeachment inquiry” September 25th 2019.  They voted impeachment December 18th.  They impeached in 54 days.  And then, on the 55th day, Nancy Pelosi rested.  The normal procedure is for the House to name impeachment managers, who deliver the articles to the Senate for trial.  But Nancy won’t do it.  See, she doesn’t control the Senate, and after running roughshod over constitutional protections in the House, Nancy now demands fairness.  If Mitch McConnell won’t continue the kangaroo court in the Senate, then Nancy won’t deliver the articles.  After Pelosi put the country through months of needless turmoil, setting citizen against citizen, and further dividing an already divided nation, Nancy Pelosi gave us her best Emily Litella smile, looked into the camera, and said, “Never mind.”  This latest outrage has prompted even Democrat “experts” to ponder whether the President really has been impeached.  The Democrats are just playing for time.  There never was any imminent threat warranting an instant impeachment.  The only time pressure was and is the upcoming 2020 election.  The Democrats have no candidate who can compete with Trump, no values, and no program to run on.  Eventually Nancy Pelosi will have to relent and send the articles to the Senate.  House managers will argue for the President’s removal.  The Senators should smile, look into the camera and say, “Never mind.  Case dismissed.”