Senate refuses Dem motions to delay hearing their "unassailable case"

And so it begins. (Thought I'd get the cliché out of the way early.) The impeachment trial of Still-President Trump got under way in the Senate this afternoon, with Democrat House Managers, led by the inevitable Adam Schiff, accusing Senate Republicans of rigging the trial with proposed rules that would prevent witnesses from testifying and bar evidence gathered by investigators. They were arguing against Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's motion proposing rules that would execute a quick trial, without new testimony or evidence.

What's wrong with that, I hear you ask. Well, say the Dumbocrats, we're not ready! We don't have all the evidence yet! (I'll pause while you let that sink in...)

Be it remembered that when Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representative Schiff urged the House of Representatives to approve their Articles of Impeachment, they crowed that they had "overwhelming evidence" of President Trump's "crimes and misdemeanours" which "imperilled national security", yada yada yada. The House duly passed the resolution.

There followed a rather lengthy pause -- 33 days! -- while Ms Pelosi pondered the wisdom of sending the Articles to the Senate. Doing so, our legal expert tells us, is the equivalent of filing a "certificate of evidence", which is what you do (in some jurisdictions) to tell a court that, all preliminary matters having been completed, you are ready (aye, ready!) to proceed to trial.

Speaking to the meeja earlier today, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said once again that the evidence that President Trump abused the power of his office and obstructed Congress is already "overwhelming". But, he said, the Senate should allow House Democrats to introduce still more evidence. Like what? Well, they're not really sure, so they want to issue subpoenas to White House staffers (Hello, Mick Mulvaney!), State Department officials, and just about everyone except the Bidens, on the off chance that someone might say something new that would buttress their "unassailable case" for impeachment.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has now introduced a number (I lost count of how many) of amendments to Senator McConnell's motion, all of which have been defeated on motion to table by votes of 53 to 47, strictly on party lines with nobody on either side of the aisle breaking ranks.

According to Fox News, Dana Perino, host of "The Daily Briefing" and co-host of "The Five", said Senator Schumer "risks losing the public's -- and the Senate's -- attention if he continues to offer these amendments." She speaks right, friends. Walt is not staying tuned.

Further reading: "Time was elections decided things. Apparently Trump's foes think they know better", by Rex Murphy, in the National Post, 21/1/19.

Footnote: Has anyone noticed that Jay Sekulow, one of the lawyers representing President Trump personally (seen here debunking the Dumbocrats' hoax of the day) bears an uncanny resemblance to the late Harold Ramis, of Ghostbusters and SCTV fame?