This politics game can have some pretty clear choices when guided by recent experience. When Mitch McConnell violated the Constitution on Merrick Garland in 2016, he took a huge election-year gamble but solidified his legacy. And, as he has said himself, he wants his mark on our federal courts to be what he is best remembered for. My sense is he will probably get his wish. Just the other day he strong-armed Senate Democrats - yet again - into greenlighting 13 more Trump appointees so everyone could go on recess. This also happened a year ago when minority leader Chuck Schumer caved and gave him 15 (lifetime) appointments in exchange for midterm campaign time for his members, which turned out to be fruitless because they not only failed to take the chamber, they actually lost seats.
Oy.
But that's American Politics 2.0. That's how McConnell has been winning as majority leader and that's how Nancy Pelosi can now win as House Speaker. And her hardball tactic du jour could well prove to be what she is reportedly considering: withholding the impeachment articles from McConnell/Trump and denying Republican senators the acquittal victory they had planned to kick off their election year.
This is paramount action to take. Unlike McConnell, Pelosi would not violate the Constitution as there is no required timetable for delivering impeachment articles. And also unlike McConnell, Pelosi has limited options. Republicans are already saying she is afraid to send them because the argument is weak. But they've also been saying the process is a sham because it was initiated in secret (there were Republicans present), Trump didn't get a fair shake (he declined to testify and was impeached for his obstruction of the process), the crime wasn't truly a crime (it was), and that it will cost Democrats politically next year (depends on the poll).
The only leverage she and Democrats have is to keep Trump's criminal status - charged but not yet convicted - in play during the election season. Republicans will keep saying all of the above. Democrats can counter by saying they did their duty, but he and his cronies are so corrupt a fair trial couldn't even be initiated. In fact, a bold Senate Democrat could even make the case for both chambers next year so a fair trial can go forward should Trump be reelected.
There are several things about a potential Senate trial we know would be true because we've experienced these people enough, or we've heard directly from their mouths what to expect.
1. The Senate will hold a trial (McConnell isn't violating the Constitution on that one yet).
2. The Senate will play by whatever rules they (Trump) want.
3. They will take as little or as much time as they want, depending on the politics. They'd love to keep Warren and Sanders totally off the campaign trail if they could.
4. All of them, including McConnell, will laughingly abdicate their duty to be impartial.
5. Trump will be acquitted.
6. Trump will be the Republican nominee for reelection in 2020.
That would be a great sequence for them next year. For Democrats, never sending the articles and accusing them of being untrustworthy with a fair trial could neutralize all their talking points, if aggressively and consistently leveled, and might prove the smartest move of Pelosi's career if she did it. Heck, it might even be the huge election-year gamble that solidifies her legacy.