Democrats are also getting fed up with Congress crying "Wolf!"

A week ago, I noted that politicians on both sides of the aisle had been crying "Wolf!" for so long that the ordinary people of this country were becoming jaded, cynical and downright disgusted by their antics.  That process appears to have been accelerating.  I'm now seeing lifelong Democrats, who've been loyal to their party for decades (if not generations in their families), openly saying that the Democratic Party in Congress has gone way too far, and is destroying itself and this country.  I'm even finding such comments in far-left-wing and progressive Web sites - not many of them, to be sure, but they're there.  The Democrat base appears to be fragmenting.

On the other hand, the Republican base appears to be solidifying in the face of the unprecedented threat to law and order posed by Democratic Party shenanigans in Congress.  Even left-leaning outlets such as The Hill are now publishing articles pointing out that the so-called "impeachment inquiry" is nothing of the sort, and has no legal standing as such.  It's nothing but an attempt to bypass normal procedures and shut out Republicans from participation in the process.

What is portrayed as an “impeachment inquiry” is actually just a made-for-cable-TV political soap opera. The House of Representatives is not conducting a formal impeachment inquiry. To the contrary, congressional Democrats are conducting the 2020 political campaign.

The House has not voted as a body to authorize an impeachment inquiry. What we have are partisan theatrics, proceeding under the ipse dixit of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). It raises the profile, but not the legitimacy, of the same “impeachment inquiry” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) previously tried to abracadabra into being without a committee vote.

Moreover, there are no subpoenas. As Secretary Pompeo observed in his fittingly tart response on Tuesday, what the committee chairmen issued was merely a letter. Its huffing and puffing notwithstanding, the letter is nothing more than an informal request for voluntary cooperation. Legally, it has no compulsive power. If anything, it is rife with legal deficiencies.

. . .

But standing committees do have subpoena power, so why not use it? Well, because subpoenas get litigated in court when the people or agencies on the receiving end object. Democrats want to have an impeachment show — um, inquiry — on television; they do not want to defend its bona fides in court.

. . .

If Democrats truly thought they had a case, they wouldn’t be in such a rush — they’d want everyone to have time to study it. But they don’t have a case, so instead they’re giving us a show.

There's more at the link.

I won't waste time publishing extracts from other articles here:  I'll merely publish their headlines, which are links to the articles concerned if you're interested enough to follow them.  If you have time, they're worth reading.

• Testimony From Ukraine Envoy Kurt Volker Directly Contradicts Democrats’ Impeachment Narrative
• Finally – John Ratcliffe Explains Why Pelosi’s “Impeachment Inquiry” is Being Run From House Intel Instead of House Judiciary…
• Democrats Constructing Impeachment Star Chamber of Whistleblowers and Leakers
• Nancy Pelosi is “Grubering” The American Electorate on Impeachment – Committee Requests, aka “Subpoenas”, Constructed to Manufacture “Obstruction”…

What's more, the impartiality and neutrality of the so-called "whistleblower" who brought the latest allegations against President Trump is now being called into question.  That being so, I wasn't in the least surprised by the alleged emergence of a second so-called "whistleblower" over the weekend.  If at first you don't succeed, try, try again . . .  (BTW, Scott Adams suggests the existence of a third whistleblower.  It's a hoot!)

The sheer scale of the visible desperation of the Democratic Party, to throw enough mud at President Trump for some of it to stick, is mind-boggling.  They've essentially given up attacking him on policy, because too much of the electorate (from their perspective) either agrees with him or isn't energized enough to oppose his policies.  Instead, they're trying to attack him personally, in the hope that he'll become unelectable.  It's the ultimate political ad hominem argument.

I'm neither Republican nor Democrat.  If evidence exists - genuine evidence, not political theater - that President Trump has acted illegally, immorally or unethically, then by all means let that evidence be made public, investigated, and followed to its logical conclusion.  However, up until now, all we've had are suspicions, innuendo, gossip, allegations and mud-slinging.  That's no way to convince anyone that the current brouhaha is anything but an exercise in partisan politics.  All it's doing is to damage the internal stability of this nation.

On the other hand, that might be exactly what some people want.  Alinsky certainly thought so, and his book has become a road map for too many left-wing and progressive politicians today.

Peter