The voters in November 2020 can and should be the judge of President Trump.   In light of the recent struggles of their party’s candidates, it seems House Democrats fear that potential judgment and want to insert their own.  Professor Jonathan Turley, a Democrat and Trump opponent, breaks down how that judgment may damage all future Presidents in his written testimony today:

To put it simply, I hold no brief for President Trump. My personal and political views of President Trump, however, are irrelevant to my impeachment testimony, as they should be to your impeachment vote. Today, my only concern is the integrity and coherence of the constitutional standard and process of impeachment. President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president.

As Rep Adam Schiff finishes his impeachment inquiry report there seems to be a feeling among even a few Democrats and academicians that there is nothing there for impeachment.  Keep in mind, this is without Republicans or the President even able to present their side. 

Democrat Rep. Jefferson Van Drew of New Jersey stated:

No president has ever been removed from office, Van Drew, 66, points out. And to have a "small, elite group" of lawmakers do so when an election is less than a year away seems to him to be not only unfathomable but un-American.

 “To some folks, that’s reminiscent of what was done to kings and queens many years ago," he said. "Everything our country doesn’t stand for."

As the impeachment inquiry continues, there have been some stories you may have missed that are worth noting.  One of them is that Chairman Adam Schiff's (D-CA) impeachment inquiry is hurting allegedly innocent targets.

The danger of the multiple hearsay testimony that Adam Schiff is employing became apparent today from an unlikely source.  Kash Patel, an official on the National Security Council, is suing Politico for defamation, and accusing the news outlet of colluding with Rep. Adam Schiff.  As the Daily Caller reports:

Yesterday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell introduced a resolution condemning the House Democrats' failure to follow standard procedures and precedents in their "impeachment inquiry" against President Trump.  The resolution called for the House to accord the President basic, constitutional due process protections.  As of today, there are fifty co-sponsors for the resolution.  

Yesterday, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone responded to the Democrats' efforts to subpoena information from the White House and Executive Branch officials, categorically rejecting their "constitutionally illegitimate proceedings." He notes that the Democrats are not allowing basic due process protections that the Supreme Court has declared must apply to congressional investigations:

While Democrats and liberal pundits would have us believe otherwise, there was no violation of campaign finance laws in President Trump’s July 25 call with the Ukrainian President.  Like so much in the campaign finance realm, Democrats are attempting to apply an interpretation of the law against foreign campaign contributions as they wish it were, instead of the law as written or how it has been interpreted to date.

Shortly after the 2018 midterm elections and the reversal of control in the House of Representatives, the Democrat majority made their policy priorities abundantly clear: impeaching President Trump, first and foremost. The impeachment demands have only gotten stronger as the voice, albeit not number, of the left-flank Liberals has grown in size among the Democratic caucus. However, today in National Review, Columnist Andrew C. McCarthy raised, and answered, an interesting question: Why haven’t these calls for impeachment gone anywhere?