Posted on Leave a comment

Professor Jonathan Turley’s Greatest Moments at the Impeachment Clown Show

For some reason, you people want to follow the impeachapalooza spectacle. For the record, I would rather write about anything else, and I do mean anything, including perineum sunning and Josh Brolin’s anus, which is more appealing to me than this clown show. But since you can’t be persuaded to care about anything else this week, here’s a round-up of law professor Jonathan Turley’s best moments. He was the only professional in the room actually talking about the Constitution and law and not taking juvenile potshots at the president and his family. Instead of shaming himself in front of the nation, Turley made decent arguments against impeachment over nothing.

“If you accept all of their presumptions, it would be obstruction. But impeachments have to be based on proof, not presumptions,” he said. (Fun factoid: Jonathan Turley was one of my sister’s favorite law professors when she attended George Washington University Law School. She’s a good lawyer too, proving he knows what he’s talking about.)

Turley then went on to point out something I’ve been shouting at my television for weeks: “There’s a difference between requesting investigations and a quid pro quo. You need to stick the landing on the quid pro quo. You need to get the evidence to support it… it’s not in this record,” he said. The question must be asked: if Hunter Biden did break a bunch of laws (which it sure seems he may have) then why is it a problem for the president of the United States to ask Ukranian officials to investigate it? Isn’t that his job, to find out if America has been ripped off by a connected son of a former vice president? That seems like his job to me.

Turley went on to caution that if this impeachment goes forward on such presumptions, which have no evidence behind them, no president will be safe from a partisan majority that wants to be rid of him.

Preaching common sense to a bunch of common idiots, Turley tried to explain in small words for small brains that there can’t be impeachment without actual evidence of wrongdoing. It’s a tough job, but someone has to try. “You want to build an impeachment? You have to have a foundation broad enough to support it.” Sir, I hate to inform you, but you are speaking to a group among whom is a person who thinks Guam could tip over if too many people are on it. And that guy has a higher IQ than Maxine Waters. I applaud your efforts, but these people are not the rational people you are looking for.

I hope that’s cured your impeachment fix for the rest of eternity because if I have to write about this snooze-fest much longer I’m not going to make it. Thoughts and prayers, please.

 

Megan Fox is the author of “Believe Evidence; The Death of Due Process from Salome to #MeToo.” Follow on Twitter @MeganFoxWriter

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *