I say it is a wonder that it has done so given the especially degraded nature of our politics and the craven nature of our politicians. Even for an "impeachment inquiry" to commence is remarkable at this stage. I suppose nobody could have expected someone even as self-regarding as the president would so blatantly, and stupidly, ignore the implications of the Mueller report and seek the support of a foreign government in an election in such a blithe manner. But ignore it he did and so he has given heart to those who think his presence in the oval office a calamity, and caused alarm among his venal and submissive supporters.
And so begins a new phase of the farce. Not even Aristophanes could have imagined this administration, and the advent of a diva president. Still, narcissism, ignorance and other attributes so spectacularly on display likely are not treason, bribery, or "high crimes and misdemeanors" and so it would be unreasonable to expect that the president will be impeached merely for being himself. What, then do they mean?
Treason and bribery are somewhat known; at least enough for most to dimly perceive when they seem to be taking place (although our Supreme Court has managed to conclude that bribery, at least when politicians and those who seek to influence them are involved,must be especially blatant). But what in God's name are "high crimes and misdemeanors?" Very few presidents have been impeached, but it seems that perjury is one of those things where they are concerned. But other civil officers of the U.S. have been impeached (mostly federal judges) and what record there is suggests that high crimes and misdemeanors need not be crimes or misdemeanors, technically speaking, and may include abuse of office or malfeasance which do not necessarily amount to criminal conduct.
So it won't be necessary that the president be found by the House of Representatives to have committed a crime, presumably. Yet it seems that not only the president's lackies--there is no other word which may be used as he cannot tolerate anyone around him who isn't servile--but also his enemies think that a serious crime must be established. How else explain the view that an American president seeking the assistance of foreign governments to harm Americans does nothing wrong?
It will be in any case be necessary that there be a trial by the Senate, and the Senators, or at least a majority of them, can be counted on to do only what is useful to them. As it seems that a majority of Senators are content to let the president do anything at all, short (perhaps) of murder or stealing money from them or their supporters, it's likely that if he is impeached by the House he will be acquitted, if that's the word, by the Senate.
Still, it promises to be quite a show, even though the actors are mostly dull, ponderous, sanctimonious, self-righteous, posturing blowhards incapable of wit. We would be better served if members of the British Parliament were involved--they at least know how to speak and would not falter when called upon to utter long, complicated words as may be expected in such proceedings, and even to think on their feet. Absent a teleprompter and a team of writers, it's anybody's guess what our politicians will blurt out at any given moment.
That it has come to this at last may, just may, indicate that there remains some self-respect and dignity in our politics and politicians, and some few, at least, who will when prompted behave as if they have principles and are unwilling to sanction the grosser efforts of the president and his supporters to feather their own nests.
There are disturbing times, when there is no honor even among thieves, and even less among those who purport to govern us.
