Impeachment is Hell?

Ken Starr said today, "Like war, impeachment is hell. It divides the country like nothing else. Those of us who lived through the Clinton impeachment understand that in a deep and personal way."  After I finished dry heaving, I tried to come up with some semblance of a response to this.  I actually listened to some of Starr's testimony.  If it had come from someone else, I might have been able to tolerate the point of view. However, for the person who made Bill Clinton's life miserable to state that he understands in a 'deep and personal way' literally makes me sick.  It's like throwing a punch and saying, let's change the rules now, you can't throw a punch back.  It is one of the most disingenuous arguments that I have ever heard in my entire life.  

Another person speaking for the White House counsel went on and on about Hunter Biden and how it might 'look' in terms of Joe Biden.  Does anyone remember Jimmy Carter's brother?  Many Presidents have had siblings or children who weren't the best.  Hunter Biden used his name to get on an incredibly great paying board.  Did he actually have influence? While I doubt it, so what?  That was four years ago.  It has no relevance today except for donald trump's vindictiveness.  Furthermore, are we saying that donald trump jr., isn't parlaying his father's presidency for his own benefit? Or, trump himself, bringing government (both foreign and domestic) business to his own ventures?  Give me a frigging break.  I thought that the republicans were saying that trump didn't even bring up Biden, and that he wasn't tying military aid to an investigation of the Biden's.  If he wasn't doing this, why bring them up?  I'm definitely not following this track of persuasion.

Then we have Alan Dershowitz, who has never met an underdog (O.J., Epstein, Von Bulow) he wouldn't find a legal argument for, so long as he got money or time on television in return. He quoted historical sources to support his argument that the articles of impeachment don't hold water.  His number one source?  Andrew Johnson's attorney!  Wow! You might have picked some other constitutional scholars, but to pick the attorney of the one president who was only acquitted by one vote?!  

All of this on the day that Bolton's book is leaked and republicans are being faced with the reality of acquitting trump only to have Bolton's story told afterward and potentially having significant egg on their face.  It's looking like they'll need to call Bolton as a witness.  Ironically, he'll tell his story, which will probably be that he's worried about our country with trump making whimsical foreign policy decisions.  John Bolton has never been considered a foreign policy "dove."  He clearly cares deeply about our country.  Let him speak, and then acquit.  I'll live with that.  Don't let him speak, and have the world wonder what the result would have been if he had testified.

Impeachment is hell?  The republicans brought us into hell with the Clinton impeachment.  Maybe after we live through it again, both sides can change the rules in a bipartisan fashion?  To ask the Democrats to turn the other cheek is laughable.  Sorry, I'm trying to be objective, but I'm just not seeing it.