After two weeks of high-stakes hearings that included “star witnesses,” an attache with the cadence and authority of Walter Cronkite, a decorated do-gooder in uniform, a British-born Russia expert who inspired fan clubs around the world and a bombshell-lobbing hotelier-turned
ambassador, the distinguished panel of academics was perhaps not the made-for-TV cast these impeachment hearings had thrived on. The witnesses painted in vivid detail the actions of a president hellbent on pressuring a foreign government to harm his political rival.
By contrast the professors’ testimony was conceptual and high-minded. They legitimized their assertions with quotations from the Founding Fathers, references to historical treaties and pleasantries that might require an advanced degree to follow. Words like “perfidy” and
“necromancy” obscured their more relatable references to a pet goldendoodle and Thanksgiving dinner.
But aside from snarky tweets, the dulcet testimony is also providing Democrats a clear rationale for removing Trump
But aside from snarky tweets, the dulcet testimony is also providing Democrats a clear rationale for removing Trump
from office that they can clip and reference in the weeks to come.
“If we cannot impeach 🍊 who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy,” said Feldman, a professor at Harvard Law School. “We live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship.”
“If we cannot impeach 🍊 who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy,” said Feldman, a professor at Harvard Law School. “We live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship.”
