The Pelosi Gambit

Republicans are in a quandary about the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. (I originally wrote "ethical quandary," but there is nothing ethical about their motives.) Republican Senators want to cover-up all of Trump's offences, but they don't want it to look too obvious. If Nancy Pelosi had transferred the articles for which Trump was impeached to the Senate immediately after his impeachment, they would have had a chance. But Pelosi had other plans.

Many people were involved in Trump's attempted extortion of Ukraine. And secrets are difficult to keep especially when the person you're covering for tends to shoot his mouth off and brag about his offences. (Remember the Access Hollywood tape.) Another concern is that Trump has no loyalties to anyone except Trump. He would turn on anyone in a heartbeat and tweet mean things about them.

Prior to Lev Parnas's document and video release and his interview, and prior to the leak of John Bolton's book, Republican Senators could acquit Trump and claim that they were acting on limited evidence -- even though Trump is the reason for the limit. They could also rationalize and deny a cover-up.

But, as Pelosi speculated, evidence and witnesses have come out and will become public. An even worse nightmare for Republicans is that they acquit Trump, and then more evidence and witnesses come out confirming his guilt. Republicans have a choice -- cover for Trump, or hold a fair trial to find the truth. Clearing Trump without allowing all evidence and witnesses to be examined and questioned is not a fair trial. It is a blatant and overt cover-up that denies Trump any claim that he is not guilty.

John L. Ferri