After a much-needed break, the impeachment hearings are back on.

It was so nice to not have to get up in the morning and watch ten hours of testimony a day for several days in a row.

The Thanksgiving recess couldn’t have come at a better time. Americans needed a break.

On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee convened to resume the impeachment inquisition.

Jerry Nadler replaced Adam Schiff in the director chair. The show must go on.

As another change of pace, there were no witnesses that were called. Instead, professors were called to testify.

Yes, seriously.

Four law professors—three of which were called by the Dems—were brought in front of the committee to describe why President Trump should be impeached.

They claimed to be citing the Founding Fathers’ rationale for impeachment as their evidence.

Don’t get me wrong, I am always excited to talk about the Founding Era. However, these professors were clearly biased against President Trump and that bias seemed to outweigh their law expertise.

The New York Times reported the following:

Noah Feldman, a professor at Harvard, argued that attempts by Mr. Trump to withhold a White House meeting and military assistance from Ukraine as leverage for political favors constitute impeachable conduct, as does the act of soliciting foreign assistance on a  phone call with the Iranian leader.

“President Trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency,” Mr. Feldman said. “Specifically, President Trump abused his office by corruptly soliciting President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce investigations of his political rivals in order to gain personal advantage, including in the 2020 presidential election.”

Pamela Karlan, a Stanford law professor, told lawmakers that the president’s attempt to “strong-arm a foreign leader” would not be considered politics as usual by historical standards.

“It is, instead, a cardinal reason why the Constitution contains an impeachment power,” she said. “Put simply, a candidate for president should resist foreign interference in our elections, not demand it. If we are to keep faith with the Constitution and our Republic, President Trump must be held to account.”

Michael Gerhardt, a professor at the University of North Carolina, planned to argue that Mr. Trump had “committed several impeachable offenses” by taking actions regarding Ukraine that were worse than Richard Nixon’s misconduct during Watergate.

“If left unchecked, the president will likely continue his pattern of soliciting foreign interference on his behalf in the next election,” Mr. Gerhardt planned to say, adding that Mr. Trump’s actions “are worse than the misconduct of any prior president.”

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University who was invited to testify by the committee’s Republicans, offered the lone dissent, arguing in his opening statement that Mr. Trump should not be impeached.

In a 53-page opening statement submitted to the committee, Mr. Turley made it clear that he is not a supporter of the president and believes that the Ukraine matter warranted investigation. But he argued that the Democratic impeachment case is dangerously “slipshod” and premature.

“I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger,” he said. “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.”

Jerry Nadler opened the proceedings by lecturing the American people on the constitutional duty that the Congress has to check abuses of power by a sitting president.

He cited the Founders and the text of the Constitution to defend his point.

That is rich coming from a liberal. It is always amazing to me that they work to actively undermine the Founders’ work, and then suddenly when it is convenient for them politically they then claim to defend the Founders and the Constitution.

Nadler claimed that Trump tried to solicit the help of a foreign government to aid him in his re-election efforts and said that the committee would be holding a hearing next week to review a report submitted on impeachment from Adam Schiff’s intelligence committee. (Yes, I see the humor in using Schiff and intelligence in the same sentence)

The ranking Republican on the committee, Congressman Collins, lit into Nadler and the Democrats.

He claimed that they wanted to impeach the president solely for the reason that they don’t like him.

Collins said that the Founders were afraid of impeaching a president for purely political reasons and that the Democrats were already drafting articles of impeachment behind the scenes.

The ranking member also said that there were no agreed-upon set of facts like there were during the impeachment hearings of former presidents Clinton and Nixon.

He then tried to file a motion to have Adam Schiff testify in front of the committee to answer for his role in assisting the whistleblower who set in motion these sham hearings in the first place.

Not surprisingly, the Democrats voted to prevent Schiff from testifying.

Wednesday’s hearing will quickly be forgotten. The American people have impeachment fatigue and the Nadler show is likely to entertain them only for a short time.

We already know how it’s going to play out: the Democrats will impeach Trump and the Republican-majority Senate will acquit him.

This is a waste of America’s time.

But at least we don’t have to hear from Adam Schiff for a little while.