And after going enough times I wrote this:

40. So your horse-drawn sleigh is being pursued by a pack of wolves & you shove your grandma out...

...to lighten the load and keep the wolves busy. Eh, she's had a full life, amirite? She'd want to make a meaningful sacrifice, you're sure.

But the wolves, being a pack, dispose of her speedily and, feeling refreshed, pursue your sleigh with renewed vigor. Your horses are in a lather.

Your sleigh is full of passengers: who next? How about a small child -- after all, its mother can have another kid someday, if she can survive this harrowing journey.

And after that snack?

THAT is the meaning of "tossing someone to the wolves." The wolfpack will never be satisfied. The goal is to kill and eat everybody in the sleigh, no survivors.

So, to put it bluntly, to hell with that idea. We already know who we are dealing with.

there is no up-side.

If they want Hunter Biden, all they have to do is vote to subpoena him. They have the votes.

Hunter has nothing to do with ... it would be a distraction only. Neither Bidens have any facts to offer regarding this president's actions and are not fact witnesses.

is to perpetuate the very behavior for which Trump is being impeached.

It would be agreeing to another quid pro quo. Don't do it - it's a trap!

Also pointed out by McCaskill, the Senate has more than the 51 votes needed to call anyone they want to testify. Turning any witness list into a quid pro quo is not necessary at all for them. If they want to call Hunter Biden, make them just do it instead of playing these games.

If Joe Biden testifies it'll be a big fat campaign ad for him. I'm willing to take the risk that it will put him over the top in the primaries, as long as he puts his thumb in the eye of the defense.