Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, left, listens as Office of Management and Budget Acting Director Russell Vought testifies before the House Budget Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 12, 2019, during a hearing on the fiscal year 2020 budget. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
If you’d bought into what the mainstream media and Democrats told you over the last two weeks about the Senate impeachment trial, you’d believe House Intel Chair Adam Schiff (D-CA) was the greatest lawyer/congressman/orator America has ever known after he did his part in presenting the House’s impeachment/removal case against President Trump.
Unsurprisingly, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) isn’t one of those people buying into what Democrats and their allies in the national press are selling. Case in point, Schiff took to Twitter on Saturday and attempted to discredit the opening arguments being made by Trump’s attorneys. Here’s what he wrote:
After listening to the President’s lawyers opening arguments, I have three observations:
They don’t contest the facts of Trump’s scheme.
They’re trying to deflect, distract from, and distort the truth.
And they are continuing to cover it up by blocking documents and witnesses.
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) January 25, 2020
To date, the tweet has received over 60,000 RTs – so a lot of people appear to agree.
But Schiff’s remarks desperately needed an injection of reality, and Crenshaw was only too happy to provide it the next day:
If you think you need more documents and witnesses to prove your case, its a good indication your weak case was never ready for a Senate trial in the first place.
That’s what happens when you’re focused on politics, not facts and truth. https://t.co/1GjJWvmX3c
— Dan Crenshaw (@DanCrenshawTX) January 26, 2020
It’s a point Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and so many other Republicans have made over the last several weeks in response to the high drama in and around D.C. amongst Democrats and the panicked media reports about whether or not new witnesses and alleged “new evidence” should be allowed during the trial.
It’s a solid point and one that Republicans should continue to make from now until election day. Because if the Democrats’ case for impeaching Trump was so weak they pushed for new witnesses and evidence at the first chance they got after impeaching him, at least two things are clear:
1) They should have never impeached Trump to begin with and
2) They really impeached him because they felt they and not the voters should decide the 2020 presidential election.
Either of those two points are a bad look for Democrats on their own, but both of them together could pack a powerful political punch with independents and swing state voters against Democrats in the fall elections. But only if Republicans like Crenshaw continue to hammer the point home that their characterizations of the Democrats’ impeachment push as a “sham process” designed to relitigate 2016 and decide 2020 have been proven to be 100% correct.