Thursday night on the radio, LevinTV host Mark Levin made quick work of dismantling the two reasons House Democrats have put forward for impeaching President Donald Trump.

Earlier this week, House Democrats announced two articles of impeachment against the president, one for abuse of power in relation to the Ukraine foreign aid controversy and another for obstruction of Congress for not complying with House Democrats' impeachment probe into the Ukraine matter.

Levin ripped into the claim that the president obstructed Congress. "Let's be blunt about this. This isn't obstruction of Congress; the president is not complying with the Democrat majority in the House. It has nothing to do with the Senate, has nothing to do with the Republicans. The Democrat majority in the House, which are making outrageous demands of an executive, which no executive in American history would ever comply with."

In response to the abuse of power claim, Levin said that "every single president can be charged with abuse of power, because the nature of our system is with three branches, one accusing the other or others of abuse when they don't comply. So there is no threshold here. The threshold is so low as to be no threshold. There's no standard here."

Yet despite the apparent lack of concern about far worse abuses of power by previous presidents, Levin pointed out, "this president, you see, if he's not impeached, well, you hear the Democrats say, we're going to lose our democracy. They don't even know it's a republic."

Listen:

Rep.-elect Chip Roy, R-Texas, hasn’t even been sworn into Congress yet, but he’s pulling no punches on policy debates, whether with his future colleagues or Democrat firebrands like Beto O’Rourke.

“Rural hospitals closing across Texas at alarming rate,” tweeted the failed 2018 Senate candidate. “Too much power in the hands of insurance companies. Return power to people and communities [with] guaranteed high quality universal healthcare. For everyone.”

Roy schooled him on what “power to people” actually means. “Fixed it: ‘Rural hospitals closing across Texas at alarming rate. Too much power in the hands of insurance companies. Return power to people & communities by empowering direct physician care, cost-sharing orgs, HSA’s, portable insurance & lowering healthcare costs. For everyone.’”

If anything, the past eight years have shown us over and over again how much power people actually get when they give the government more control over their health care. Hint: It ain’t a whole lot.

To put it in medical terms: Prescribing more government for a government-created problem will just make a bad prognosis worse.

This town needs a spanking.

Election or no election, our collective sense of unruly pride needs to be taken down a couple of notches. Rarely has a people been so haughty with so little to back it up.

We are ignorant and we are selfish. We are licentious and we are boorishly iconoclastic. It’s quite a gift we have to be so slothful and destructive at the very same time.

Yes, a good spanking would do us a world of good if we are to have any hope of correcting the ship of state before it is too late. As I have long said, politics swims downstream from culture. And a culture that is incapable of understanding its base, corruptible nature and disciplining itself accordingly will end up living in a fetid swamp.

But I guess we can’t have nice things, because the American Academy of Pediatrics has spoken, and it says spanking is bad. There are mountains of research, they say. According to analysis posted at CNN, and we know how lucid that network has been lately, spanking teaches children that it is acceptable to use physical force to get what you want and thus makes aggressive or delinquent behaviors more likely.

Also published under the laughable headline “The era of spanking is finally over” is this: “Millions of parents have raised well-adjusted children without spanking. Kids thrive on attention from adults.”

Time for some questions. What does “well-adjusted” mean? How about “thriving”? And what kind of “attention” are we talking about?

Just last year, it seems the American Academy of Pediatrics defined those terms this way when the federal Departments of Justice and Education took the crazy step of reminding the so-called “well-adjusted” that boys and girls should continue to have separate bathrooms free from the tyranny of progressive politics:

"The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) opposes guidance issued … that eliminates protections for transgender youth in public schools, no longer allowing them to use restrooms corresponding with their gender identity. Transgender children are already at increased risk for violence, bullying, harassment and suicide. They may be more prone to depression and engaging in self-harm. These children need acceptance and affirmation, not stigmatization. As a result of last night's action by the Departments of Justice and Education, the simple act of using the restroom may subject transgender students to further harm. Policies excluding transgender youth from facilities consistent with their gender identity have detrimental effects on their physical and mental health, safety and well-being. No child deserves to feel this way.”

Call me crazy, but I don’t think “well-adjusted” means what they think it means. Seems like this New Age version amounts to affirming the worst of psychosis in children and then demanding everyone else around them kneel in adoring acceptance.

That’s not “thriving.” That’s suicide.