THE DIFFERENCE APPEARS TO BE A VERY FINE LINE.

Watching the Senate impeachment trial has been one of the most painful experiences of my entire life.

The House has presented a powerful and to me more than enough case for its indictment.

The Senate majority has so far rejected out of hand any additional witnesses or documents (even for subsequently revealed evidence) claiming that it is not their job AND that by asking for ‘more’ evidence the House is admitting that the evidence they already have introduced is insufficient. There never can be too much evidence, until it is conceded.

If the Senate wants to endorse a President demanding foreign help in seeking his reelection, it is free to do so. But, it will have to live with that fact for history and the American people, if that is what they are doing. That just might lead to a major change in the makeup of Congress comparable to the late 1930s [when the Democrats achieved super majorities in both Houses of Congress], which is hard to imagine could be their intent.

If the Senate wants to fight the House evidence, it needs first to offer contradictory evidence from its own witnesses. Otherwise it is simply attempting to cover up for the President.

Everything is so bizarre that it almost seems the Capital has been turned upside down!

The basic precedent involved is that no POTUS can or should ever have unaccountable power to override the power of Congress to investigate the actions of a President in the national interest.