Hmm, I think “to terrify” is the point. We should be more serious to retain credibility.

So, her entire justification for subverting the democratic process is that it's the only way to pass her narrow agenda? Is she at all familiar with American democracy or is she thinking of the failed socialism of her Indian youth? God help us should we find the middle ground!

This entire argument is vapid. Impeachment is a constitutional process, in that the constitution is a legal AND political document. But this article is a weak attempt to insist citizens care about it as an existential matter. Please.

The result is and always will be the politics because the "jury" in this process is the Senate, whose primary concern is to represent the political interests and demands of their constituents. Thus, they are not thinking of existential matters, but political consequences.

An impeachment trial that contradicts public opinion anywhere north of 30% risks a political upheaval which would constitute a greater threat to American society than anything that could emanate from the Oval Office. Everybody knows this and protestations to the contrary are more vacuous whining from a narrow opposition. It falls on deaf ears.