The Democrats’ purported outrage about President Donald Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky might be taken seriously by the Republicans were it not for the Democrats’ drive to oust Trump from the moment he won the presidency.

CNN’s Van Jones, with zero proof, attributed Trump’s victory to “whitelash.” Trump received 57% of the white vote, actually a lower percentage of the white vote than the 59% received by Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate in 2012. In 2008, Democrat Barack Obama received a greater percentage of the white vote than John Kerry did four years earlier. Obama also received 95% of the black vote. None dared call it “blacklash.”

Stunned, angry and bewildered by Trump’s win, some Democrats urged the Electoral College to refuse to certify his victory. In a Washington Post op-ed, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, said, “The (Obama) administration should brief members of the electoral college on the extent and manner of Russia’s interference in our election before they vote on Dec. 19 (2016).”

Nearly 70 Democratic lawmakers vowed to boycott Trump’s inauguration. Nearly a dozen Democrats refused to attend Trump’s first State of the Union address. In explaining his refusal to attend, Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., said, “This is a presidency that has been built on racism, stupidity and lies, which has already wasted enough of America’s time and I will not waste any more of mine.”

Trump’s refusal to turn over his tax returns provoked claims of corruption. Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., said: “What’s unprecedented is (Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin) refusing to comply with our lawful, Article I request. What’s unprecedented is a Justice Department that again sees its role as being bodyguard to the executive and not the rule of law. What’s unprecedented is an entire federal government working in concert to shield a corrupt President from legal accountability.”

There was the bill introduced in April 2017 by Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., with 67 co-sponsors, to determine whether to invoke the 25th Amendment, under which a president can be removed if “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” About his bill, Raskin told Vanity Fair last month: “It is still very much on my mind and the time will come. I don’t think of it as an alternative remedy for impeachment. They address different problems. The core of the concern of impeachment is high crimes and misdemeanors committed by the president. The core problem addressed by the 25th Amendment is the mental or physical incapacity of the president.”

Then there was the outcry over Trump’s payments to former mistresses. About the payments, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said: “The president is a criminal. … This criminal must be brought up by the Congress of the United States for impeachment.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said from “day one” Trump committed and impeachable for allegedly violating the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits all persons holding federal office from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” Last year, Ocasio-Cortez said about Trump: “I think that there are serious grounds in violations of the emoluments clause from day one. I think that is, first and foremost, one of the basic elements and violations. And then, once again, it’s hard to predict what’s going to happen over the next few months. There are one or more investigations happening. But I think from day one we have had violations of the emoluments clause with the presidency.”

In July, Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, wanted Trump impeached for his “racist tweets” that attacked several Democratic freshman House members known as “the squad.” Green tweeted: “(Trump’s) racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, and Islamophobia can no longer be tolerated or ignored. We must impeach.”

One can only marvel at how, with a straight face, Democrats call Trump “racist” while embracing as “kingmaker” the race card-hustling Rev. Al Sharpton and refusing to denounce anti-Semitic Minister Louis Farrakhan.

Of course, for 2 ½ years, special counsel Robert Mueller investigated allegations of Russian “collusion,” and he drilled a dry hole. On the issue of obstruction of justice, he punted. Before the Mueller report came out, House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, D-Calif., claimed there was “direct evidence (of collusion) but … also abundant circumstantial evidence.”

If Congress impeaches Trump, the Senate will not convict. Meanwhile, all this Ukraine business just places attention on Joe’s Biden’s son. Hunter Biden received a lucrative monthly fee to sit on the board of director a Ukrainian energy company, despite his lack of energy expertise or his inability to speak the local language. Joe Biden’s candidacy will be irreparably harmed, increasing the odds that hard-left Elizabeth Warren will win the Democratic nomination. Trump, post-impeachment, can credibly call himself a victim of a political vendetta and ride that narrative to victory in 2020.

Well played, Speaker Pelosi.

COPYRIGHT 2019 LAURENCE A. ELDER