As the (stupid) impeachment trial of (our amazing) President Donald Trump moves forward in the U.S. Senate, there’s one looming question the doggone deranged Democrats keep asking: Why don’t the president and his Republican supporters in Congress want any witnesses to testify?
It’s a zany question, of course, because the answer is simply: “Because.” What more do you need, snowflake?
The president has already said his phone call with the Ukrainian president, a central part of the impeachment case, was “perfect.” He has already said the impeachment is a “hoax” and a “sham.” By never reading a single fact-check, I have seen zero evidence that President Trump is capable of lying, so why in the world do Democrats think he needs more people to step forward and prove his innocence?
It’s an absurd demand. But the libs just won’t shut up about it, and they keep going on and on about “evidence” and “testimony” and how “no reasonable person who knows people can prove he’s innocent would prevent those people from testifying, it literally makes no sense whatsoever.”
During the first day of the trial on Tuesday, Rep. Val Demings of Florida, one of the Democratic House impeachment managers, said: “As a career law enforcement officer, I have never seen anyone take such extreme steps to hide evidence allegedly proving his innocence. And I do not find that here today. The president is engaged in this cover-up because he is guilty, and he knows it.”
NICE TRY, DEMINGS! If the president knows he’s guilty, why would he have so loudly proclaimed his innocence? Checkmate.
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, also a Democratic impeachment manager, said: “A fair trial requires witnesses in order to provide the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”
Does it? Not when the accused is known by everyone (who listens to Fox News’ Sean Hannity) as a paragon of virtue and an esteemed truth-teller.
While the do-nothing Democrats continue this charade in the Senate, let me present a reasonable explanation for why Trump is fighting tooth and nail to block even a scrap of evidence or testimony that could be exculpatory.
What do we know? We know Trump is the greatest president in history. We know he is an amazing man who has accomplished remarkable things. And we know he is honest and only interested in helping others.
So why would this model human being not want brilliant folks—such as acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, former national security adviser John Bolton and former Energy Secretary Rick Perry—to testify and prove his innocence?
I can answer that with one word: humility.
Donald Trump is a very humble man—he would undoubtedly say the most humble ever—and I’m sure he’s worried that if any of the people he has surrounded himself with in the White House were to testify, they might reveal amazing details about his fabulousness.
For example, imagine Mulvaney, under oath, describing the perfectness of Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president while also noting that Trump looked staggeringly handsome while making the call. How embarrassing would that be for someone as modest as Trump?
Bolton would certainly knock down any and all accusations against the president, but while doing so he might accidentally reveal Trump’s affinity for explaining why he considers Kantian ethics superior to utilitarianism. Talk about mortifying!
Perry would surely annihilate the Democrats’ allegations against Trump. But given Perry’s history as a competitor on “Dancing With the Stars,” he’s likely to know things about Trump’s appreciation for neoclassical ballet and interpretive dance.
The president has worked hard to hide his deep appreciation for the arts, reading, philosophy and cogent thought. And he clearly hates drawing attention to himself. So the only conclusion is: Our unassuming president is terrified that if witnesses are allowed at his impeachment trial, they’ll speak too highly of him.
Yes, a regular, nonhumble person accused of wrongdoing would trot out anyone who could prove the allegations false. And yes, every other impeachment trial in American history has included witnesses. And admittedly, it’s almost impossible to believe a person with nothing to hide would block evidence and testimony.
Granted, it seems odd that lawmakers from one political party, sworn to uphold the Constitution and under oath as impartial jurors, would not insist that witnesses to what they claim is perfectly legal presidential behavior step up and testify.
And sure, I suppose the whole thing, taken out of context, smells fishier than a dock downwind of a tuna cannery.
But doubting Trump’s innocence would require two things supporters like me could never embrace: Believing Democrats are right. Believing Trump is lying.
So let’s stick with my theory about Trump’s humility. It’s not that he fears the truth. He just fears the truth will be too awesome for us all to handle.
Rex Huppke is a columnist for the Chicago Tribune.