Well..that's a nice analogy--however I don't think it accurately represents the reality of impeachment. Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding, as you know, it is a political affair. Since anyone with half a brain knows that the articles are DOA in the Senate, one must reflect on just what the motives of the Democratic leadership are?
As I have said before, I think this is just one long campaign ad. By refusing..or delaying..the formal presentation of the Articles to the Senate, Pelosi and company have grabbed the news cycle--and I think that is the prime motive for all these machinations.
Impeach him once, twice..hell..go for three times..it will make no difference to the Senate..if Pelosi even intends to actually present the articles at all.
The longer she delays, the more the process descends into farce. A lot of people are getting tired of the unrelenting droning of facts...I don't see it making a lot difference..or changing a lot of minds..at this juncture.
You see...I think you are hung up on Trump's guilt---and not giving enough credence to the clear fact that his guilt is irrelevant...to the Senate. This delay has only served to harden their stance..and empower them.
I think Trump is as crooked as a dog's hind leg...but most of the country knows that...and they seem resigned to it. Times are good for many right now...and for many...the whole impeachment thing is sliding into irrelevance. A Senate trial..with the high drama that entails, could recapture their attention...but Pelosi knows that once she presents the articles..she is irrelevant--thus the delay.
I know Trump's guilt is irrelevant to the majority of the Senate, Eye, I really, really have no doubt they will acquit. The process how they get there is what this fight is about at the time, and that fight entirely legit. What Pelosi is doing is to put some Senators in tough races on the spot, into the spotlight. Are they going to support a trial as envisioned by the Founders, including calling eminently important witnesses, or are they going to appear complicit with a crook who maintains he has exculpatory evidence but wouldn't even show it in a friendly-to-him environment, such as the Senate? That's the question Pelosi now puts to these Senators, and to that crook, McConnell, in particular, who is himself in a re-election fight that looks more complicated every day he his dithering, insulting, or lying on behalf of Trump.
Pelosi will present the Articles of Impeachment, and before long, that is, not long after the recess, when the rules of the game are known. She said so, and unless there are marked changes justifying a different course, she'll do exactly as she said. Otherwise, it'll look like a farce, and I am confident she knows it (probably better than the two of us combined).
I wholly reject the notion Pelosi withholds the Articles to appear relevant; if that were her aim, she would have started impeachment proceedings in 2017, after Comey's firing, and she wouldn't be done writing Articles right now. That's not what she did, and that's clearly not her aim.
I also note, I know it's not a criminal trial. If it were, all the witnesses Trump muffled would have appeared, in handcuffs if need be, and testified, and all the documents would have been produced, and Trump would be heading for the slammer, shortly. It is, however, an analog, however imperfect, to a trial, allowing politics to form the outcome. That doesn't mean we cannot apply criteria - like "due process", or making available witnesses with pertinent knowledge, along with evidentiary standards and trial logic - to judge the proceedings. I find, Pelosi plays this artfully to make Trump and his henchmen in the Senate and the White House, and their dodging and stalling, as dirty they are, and as dirty as it is - at least so far. We'll have to wait and see whether she overplays what she's been dealt. Trump couldn't have made a worse choice picking a person with whom to start a fight. And his insulting, lying, flailing six-page letter on the day before the impeachment vote demonstrates it.
