After throwing around the usual tired cliches and catch-phrases often used by the Left, one thing remains clear. He hasn't made his case.
Here is but one example of his folly, from this piece:
The burgeoning movement for impeachment is a rational response to a moment when polls tell us that roughly three-quarters of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Sounds good if you one of the people that suffer from BDS, and repeat every left-wing talking point you hear. But this is as faulty a statement as telling someone grass is pink.
From Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution comes this bit of information that Mr. Nichols should reacquaint himself with before making such outlandish statements:
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
That's a far cry from what John claims is cause for impeachment. Nowhere does it say that a President can be removed for taking the country in the wrong direction. You may not like the President, you may hate his guts, and you may hate his policy. But that is not sufficient cause for impeachment, period.
Read Mr. Nichols' weak and faulty arguments thoroughly, and then show us all where there has been a crime committed by the President. I cannot find any, but maybe I am missing something.