It’s all over but the gloating. The impeachment trial of President Donald Trump ended with an acquittal in the Senate, as everybody (with the possible exception of Pollyanna and Chuck Shumer) knew it would. Were you paying attention o the proceedings? Do you know what happened? Pinky swear? Okay, we aren’t going to hold you to a pinky swear. If you would like to get a sense of how well you understand what happened, just answer the following questions.
1) What the heck was that whole kerfuffle about?
a) well! Apparently, President Trump had a phone call with this veeerrry nice President Zelensky of Ukraine – no, not the Ukraine, dearie, just Ukraine. Aaaaaanyway, our President told their President that he – our President, I mean – wouldn’t give him – their President, natch – $300 million in military aid that had been earmarked by Congress – our government, not theirs – until he – their guy – gave him – our guy – what he wanted: an investigation into his main rival for President – of our country. Yeeeees! Yes, he did! I know, right? Well, no, of course our President doesn’t have the power to do that! So that nice Speaker of the House – she wears pearls so well, doesn’t she? Very composed and in control and and and shiny – anyway, she started an impeachment investigation. And it just grew from there
b) American President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had an argument about who ate the last piece of pizza at a NATO summit sleepover. Really, that’s all that happened – there was no need to make an international incident out of it!
c) it was just a case of mistaken identity: President Trump thought he was Louis XIV
2) How does impeachment work?
a) impeachment is like an Oreo cookie: a tasty layer of argument and obfuscation is smushed between a biscuit of a House Impeachment Inquiry and a biscuit of a Senate Impeachment Trial (and, like an Oreo, it goes down a treat with a glass of milk!)
b) a lot of people say a lot of things, a lot of other people respond by saying a lot of other things, then a vote is taken…after which a lot more people say a lot more things and more votes are taken, at the end of which something consequential doesn’t happen. So, it’s like most of what happens in Congress, but with a heightened sense of historic purpose
c) impeachment works?
3) Shall we start with the House Impeachment Inquiry? The –
a) yes
b) no
c) wait, there was a dash – in my eagerness to get this quiz over with, did I cut you off?
3-2) Yes. Yes, you did. As I was asking: the Trump administration claimed national security blanket immunity, insisting that nobody who was working for the administration, nobody who had ever worked for the administration, nobody who was related to or knew anybody in the administration, and nobody who would be able to pick anybody in the administration out of a police lineup give testimony to the Impeachment Inquiry. Furthermore, they would not give any of the committees investigating the Ukraine shemazzle documents related to it, documents adjacent to it or documents at a far remove from it. Are these the acts of an innocent man?
a) sure they are. I mean, the President must be innocent of something, right? Nobody can be guilty of everything…
b) no, they’re the acts of Hilary Clinton
c) the fact you believe in innocence shows that there is still at least one innocent person in the world, and Gord bless you for that!
4) Despite the fact that White House told people not to testify, the House Impeachment Inquiry heard testimony from 17 current or former government officials. What was the most damning testimony given at the hearings?
a) former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified about how associates of President Trump unleashed the fury of a box of ferrets into the embassy
b) Gordon Sondland, US Ambassador to the European Union, testified that he heard the President demanding that the box of furious ferrets be emptied into the American embassy in Ukraine
c) Fiona Hill, former National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia, testified that she was demoted when she wouldn’t go along with the release of furious ferrets into the American embassy in Ukraine
d) Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman testified that it was unusual for the White House to interfere in operations in former Soviet states by ordering the release of furious ferrets into the – are you beginning to see a common thread in the testimony, here?
5) Republicans have argued that the House Impeachment Inquiry was unfair. What was the most unfair thing about it?
a) Republicans were not allowed to attend the hearings or question witnesses…except for the 43 Republican members of the relevant committees who were allowed to attend the hearings and question the witnesses
b) no official documents were seen during the Inquiry, documents that could have exonerated the President…except that the White House refused to hand any documents over
c) the House did not invite President Trump to come in and give his side of the story…except that it did
6) How did the Republicans try to bring the public’s attention to this essential unfairness?
a) they stamped their little feet and clenched their little fists and cried that they wouldn’t eat their broccoli until the House Democrats left them alone
b) when the President tweeted that the House Impeachment Investigation was a “hoax,” a “witchhunt,” and “the actions of a bunch of desperate meanies,” not a single Republican pointed out that the House had every right – and arguably, a serious responsibility – to conduct the investigation
c) 30 of them took a SCIF drink and invaded a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility where they believed the hearings were being held. They weren’t, but it was a great photo op, and taking in their insecure cellphones had the added benefit of compromising the security of the SCIF
7) When the House voted to impeach President Trump, Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not immediately send the two articles of impeachment to the Senate for a trial. Why did she do this?
a) she was waiting for the public to forget that she had them so it would come as a surprise to everybody
b) she was waiting for President Trump to forget she had them so it would come as a surprise to him
c) Rush Limbaugh dared her to
8) How did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell respond to Speaker Pelosi withholding the articles of impeachment?
a) “Well played, sir. Well played.”
b) “The Senate will not be dictated to by somebody who in no way looks like an amphibian!”
c) “How dare the Speaker of the House make up the rules as she goes along? That’s my prerogative!”
9) When the Senate finally did receive the articles of impeachment, the Senators took an oath to hear all of the evidence and render “impartial justice.” Long before that, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he would work hand in glove (in pocket) with the President to refute the charges, and some Republican Senators assured voters that their minds were already made up. So, what about that oath, then?
a) they had their fingers crossed behind their backs when they took the oath
b) they believed it was Opposite Day in Washington when they took the oath
c) oath, schmoath! We’ve got conservative judges to appoint and progressive legislation from the House to stop!
10) The Republican majority in the Senate refused to call witnesses or look at documentary evidence during the Impeachment Trial. This was a trial in the same sense that…
a) …a Fiat is a great machine to make toast.
b) …President Trump is a compassionate Conservative. (Or, for that matter, a compassionate liberal. A compassionate anything, really…)
c) …blowing your nose is a good way of wiping your – okay, you get the idea…
11) What was the defence of the President’s behaviour at his Senate trial?
a) the President did nothing wrong
b) there are no witnesses to show that there was a quid pro quo, so the President did nothing wrong
c) just because some people think that there was a quid pro quo doesn’t mean there was – because there wasn’t – so the President did nothing wrong
d) the President’s demand that aid to Ukraine have conditions put on it is something that politicians always do, so the President did nothing wrong
e) all of the above
12) It seems like there’s something…missing from the President’s defence. What could it be?
a) a claim of innocence
b) a refutation of the facts of the case
c) witnesses or documents attesting to the President’s honest intentions and overall integrity
d) all of the above
13) One of the lawyers for the President’s defence argued that if his behaviour is in the national interest, it cannot be a crime, and, if he believes his re-election is in the national interest, anything he does to get re-elected cannot be a crime. How self-serving is this argument?
a) 27 on the 3 to 13 Nixonian Self-justification Index
b) -27 on the 1 to 100 Einstein-Machiavelli Relativity Scale
c) look: when the evidence is so damning that you can’t argue that a client is innocent, you have to get creative, okay?
14) More than one Republican Senator stated that the case had, in fact, been made by the House Managers at the Impeachment Trial. How did they justify voting against removing the President from office anyway?
a) what he did was a low – okay, a medium crime at best, so it wasn’t worth the cost of redecorating the Oval Office
b) since the glove didn’t fit, I had to acquit
c) if I don’t vote to acquit the President, when I’m up for reelection, I’ll face a primary challenge; I would rather face the wrath of the voters for voting to acquit. Unlike the President, many of them will forget…
15) Republican Mitt Romney became the first Senator to vote to remove a President of his party from office in the history of the United States. How was he rewarded for his principles?
a) death threats
b) withering humiliation from Fox News, anonymous internet trolls and, surprise surprise, President Trump
c) demands that he resign from some of his constituents
d) other
16) Republican Senator Susan Collins claimed she voted to not remove President Trump from office because she felt that “he had learned his lesson.” What lesson would that be?
a) you can’t put the toothpaste back in the film festival programme
b) with great power comes no responsibility
c) when people told him to “be yourself,” they never imagined how much acquittal at an impeachment trial would free him to do just that
17) What lesson did the President claim to have actually learned?
a) the Democrats are evil, so his constant pursuit of self-interest is righteous
b) if you only brush your teeth every other day, only half of your teeth will be protected
c) you think this President learns from experience? Oh, you really are adorable!
18) Two days after the trial verdict, Lieutenant Colonel Vindman and Ambassador Sondland were fired. What do the two men have in common?
a) English is not their first language (nor, judging by his testimony, is it Sondland’s current language)
b) they both had haircuts that caused them to be ostracized in their high schools, so they hid their yearbooks so deep it would require a proctologist with decades of experience to find them
c) they both testified to the House Impeachment Inquiry that President Trump did indeed, demand a quid pro quo with Ukraine…and they’re both great kissers
19) What is the historical precedent for Donald Trump’s Exoneration Victory Tour 2020?
a) after he was acquitted at his impeachment trial, President Andrew Johnson served out his term and failed at several attempts to win a Senate seat. He was eventually successful in 1875; four months later, he died of a stroke
b) after he was acquitted at his impeachment trial, President Bill Clinton served out his term and disappeared into the private sector, never to be heard from again
c) President Richard Nixon resigned before he was impeached, so we will never know with any certainty how he would have celebrated his acquittal at his impeachment trial, but some measure of gloating would be expected
20) What did we learn from all of this?
a) it takes a village to destroy the house of a child
b) flossing every other day will only protect half of your teeth
c) comic metaphor can only do so much in the face of a group of people determined to destroy democracy