The Bug-Eyed Bitch of Burbank is at it again.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff came the closest he ever has to endorsing President Trump’s impeachment during an interview Sunday.
The California Democrat told CNN’s Jake Tapper he believed that impeachment should be a “remedy of last resort, not first resort.”
Schiff then pointed to reports that claimed Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Hunter Biden, the son of Democratic political rival Joe Biden, while withholding military aid from the country.
“That may be the only remedy that is coequal to the evil that that conduct represents,” Schiff said of impeachment.
The next steps for Schiff include hearing from the acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire, who has agreed to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
“We are going to make sure we get that complaint,” he added.
The White House has so far stonewalled Congress from getting a whistleblower complaint filed last month with the inspector general of the intelligence committee, which reportedly detailed a disturbing conversation the president had with a world leader – and also contained a “promise.”
The Wall Street Journal reported that during a July phone call with Zelensky, Trump asked the leader eight times to work with his personal lawyer, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, to investigate Biden’s son.
“It may be that we do have to move forward with this extraordinary remedy if indeed the president is, at the same time withholding vital military assistance, he is trying to leverage that to obtain impermissible help with his presidential campaign,” Schiff said.
He also pointed out the political reality: even if the Democratic-controlled House voted to impeach Trump, the Republican-led Senate would likely vote to keep him in office.
“They have shown their willingness to carry the president’s baggage no matter how soiled its contents,” Schiff said.
Schiff added that he had spoken to a number of his Democratic colleagues this week.
“This seems different,” he noted.
“And we may very well have crossed the Rubicon here,” Schiff said.
If the Democrats have crossed the Rubicon, this will not end well. People like Piece of Schiff should not use idioms they don’t understand.
Julius Caesar’s crossing the Rubicon river was an event in January 49 BC that precipitated the Roman Civil War, which ultimately led to Caesar becoming dictator and the rise of the imperial era of Rome. Caesar had been appointed to a governorship over a region that ranged from southern Gaul to Illyricum (but not Italy). As his term of governorship ended, the Roman Senate ordered Caesar to disband his army and return to Rome. He was explicitly ordered not to bring his army across the Rubicon river, which was at that time a northern boundary of Italy. In January of 49 BC, Caesar brought the 13th legion across the river, which the Roman government considered insurrection, treason, and a declaration of war on the Roman Senate. According to some authors, he is said to have uttered the phrase “alea iacta est”—the die is cast—as his army marched through the shallow river.
When Caesar crossed the Rubicon it set off the Roman Civil War, a four-year conflict that ended the Roman Republic. Is that really what the Democrats want?
In 45 BC Julius Caesar was victorious. Then he made himself dictator. Does Piece of Schiff think he’s Julius Caesar in this drama?
A year later, in 44 BC, Julius Caesar was assassinated. Does Piece of Schiff think he’s Julius Caesar in this drama?
I think it is fair to say that crossing the Rubicon did not work out well for Julius Caesar in the long run. It didn’t work out so well for Rome either.
I will leave you with a bit of advice that Ralph Waldo Emerson gave to Oliver Wendell Holmes:
“When you strike at a king, you must kill him.”