Petri: Joke’s on you Democrats for seeking impeachment vote

You thought we were serious about our ‘procedural’ demands? Ha! Fooded you, suckers.

By Alexandra Petri / The Washington Post

How I laugh at the House Democrats! They should be ashamed of themselves for believing (as naive children believe) that we meant anything we said! Oh, what a laugh! Put on your cap and bells! Yes, you are the source of my mirth, and I laugh into the face of you, ho ho! Dingle dingle! That is me, doing an onomatopoeic rendition of the sounds that your folly makes!

I’m sorry, I just can’t; I can’t get over it. You thought our words had meaning. The joke is on you.

We said we wanted a full House vote to proceed with impeachment, and you thought we weren’t just saying it. You thought our words meant something.

We said it with a straight face. And you, you clowns, you took us at our word. Oh my — *snort* I’m sorry, no, this is just — I can’t. You actually thought we were serious! You actually thought we wanted a vote! That we had actual procedural objections to what was going on, and — *louder snort* I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m getting it together — you agreed to a procedural vote, thinking it was going to assuage those concerns! But all assuaging us does is make an ass out of U! I can’t remember how the “aging” fits in there, but it does.

When the House minority leader tweeted on Oct. 15 that “Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Schiff just doubled down on their plan to sneak impeachment past the American people: Behind closed doors; Without due process; Without a single vote. This is a total sham,” you thought those were genuine objections! You thought that if a vote was agreed upon, that would make things better! You took us SERIOUSLY and LITERALLY, like true losers! People should never take anyone’s words as reflecting their interior reality, especially not when those words come from a public figure or appear to be a statement of principle. That way, you will never be disappointed. We learned this the hard way.

Aren’t you embarrassed?! Giving us what we said we wanted!

No, no! Now I agree with the sentiment of another of our members: “Let me get this straight, after running a closed-door process for weeks & selectively leaking info that fits their impeach-at-all-costs narrative, now Dems expect us to vote to legitimize their #ParodyImpeachment? Give me a break. There’s no salvaging this tainted process.” The joke is on you! You gave us what we asked for, but we don’t want it now! Sorry, now that you have agreed to it, that just proves that you were wrong before! You thought this was winnable! You thought this was an argument put forth in good faith!

Oh, man, I’m sorry, did you think that the people who stormed into the SCIF cared about procedure, too? You’re so painfully naive. I bet you thought we were serious about the Clinton emails!

You sweet summer child, you naive baby, you thought we meant any of this. You are the fool.

Follow Alexandra Petri on Twitter @petridishes.

More in Opinion

Editorial cartoons for Saturday, Feb. 22

A sketchy look at the day in politics.… Continue reading

Editorial: Avoid damaging trade war over Boeing tax break

At the jetmaker’s request, state lawmakers are considering suspension of a lucrative tax incentive.

Schwab: How ‘justice’ is defined at the law firm of Trump & Barr

When Barr complains Trumps’ tweets make it hard to do his job, he means the job of serving him, and only him.

President Trump must be removed from office

Donald Trump is without grace and without honor. He’s irrational, illogical, immovable,… Continue reading

Herald more balanced than I thought?

There have been many times that I nearly cancelled my subscription to… Continue reading

Editorial cartoons for Friday, Feb. 21

A sketchy look at the day in politics.… Continue reading

Editorial: Your presidential primary ballots are in the mail

But if you’re voting for a Democrat, you might want to wait before marking your choice.

Editorial: Insurance fee could limit wildfire risk, damage

A modest tax would fund $63 million each year for forest health and fighting wildfires in the state.

Editorial: Our county’s dubious distinction on school funding

The failure rate for levies and bonds in the county is in contrast to 90 percent approval statewide.

Most Read