IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO? - Hallo friendsGOOD OF CONEX NEWS, In the article you read this time with the title IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO?, We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article health, Article news, Article sport, Article tips, Article treatment, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title : IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO?
link : IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO?

IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO?

Democrats must seize and 

define this moment. 

Otherwise, Trump will.

By: Eugene Robinson
The Washington Post
22 April 2019

The constitutional case for impeaching President Trump was best made two decades ago by one of his most servile Republican enablers, Lindsey O.  Graham, now the senior senator from South Carolina:

“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body [the Senate] determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role . . . because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

The political case for moving deliberately but fearlessly toward impeachment is even clearer: If timorous Democrats do not seize and define this moment, Trump surely will.

What just happened is that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III delivered a searing indictment of a president who has no idea what “honor” and “integrity” even mean — a president who lies almost pathologically, who orders subordinates to lie, who has no respect for the rule of law, who welcomed Russian interference in the 2016 election, who clumsily tried to orchestrate a coverup , who tried his best to impede a lawful Justice Department investigation and failed only to the extent that aides ignored his outrageous and improper orders.What Trump claims just happened is a “witch hunt.”

Anyone who thinks there is a chance that Trump will lick his wounds and move on has not been paying attention. Having escaped criminal charges — because he is a sitting president — Trump will go on the offensive. With the help of Attorney General William P. Barr, whose title really should be Minister of Spin, the president will push to investigate the investigators and sell the bogus counter narrative of an attempted “coup” by politically motivated elements of the “deep state.”

Here is the important thing: Trump will mount this attack no matter what Democrats do . And strictly as a matter of practical politics, the best defense against Trump has to be a powerful offense.

I fail to see the benefit for Democrats, heading into the 2020 election, of being seen as such fraidy-cats that they shirk their constitutional duty. Mueller’s portrait of this president and his administration is devastating. According to Graham’s “honor and integrity” standard — which he laid out in January 1999, when he was one of the House prosecutors for President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in the Senate — beginning the process of impeaching Trump is not a close call.

It is also important for Democrats to keep their eyes on the prize. The election is the one guaranteed opportunity to throw Trump and his band of grifters out of the White House, and the big anti-Trump majority that was on display in last year’s midterm elections must be maintained and, one hopes, expanded.

But that task will largely fall to the eventual Democratic nominee, whoever that turns out to be. Presidential contenders should be free to position themselves however they see fit on the impeachment question. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has chosen to single herself out by leading the charge. Others may choose to demur and focus instead on the kitchen-table issues, such as health care, that polls show voters care about.

But most Democratic members of Congress (believe it or not) are not running for president. Their focus has to be on their constitutional duty — and nowhere in the Constitution does it say “never mind about presidential obstruction of justice or abuse of power if there’s an election next year.”

I have no intention of letting congressional Republicans off the hook. They have constitutional responsibilities as well, though it’s clear they will not fulfill them. Imagine, for a moment, if the tables were turned — if a GOP majority were running the House and a Democratic president did half of what Trump did. Do you think Republicans would hesitate for a New York minute? Articles of impeachment would have been drawn up long ago and stern-faced senators, including Graham, would already be sitting in judgment.

The conventional wisdom is that Republicans made a political error by impeaching Clinton. But they did win the White House in 2000 and go on to dominate Congress for most of President George W. Bush’s tenure. If impeachment was a mistake, it wasn’t a very costly one.

Does it “play into Trump’s hands” to speak of impeachment? I think it plays into the president’s hands to disappoint the Democratic base and come across as weak and frightened. Voters who saw the need to hold Trump accountable decided to give Democrats some power — and now expect them to use it.

NOTE:  What the argument over "impeach or not to impeach" is actually about strategy.  Philosophically, there is really no question that not only does Trump deserve to be impeached, it is virtually imperative that he is impeached.  This is the "values" argument, the one that says "to allow Donald Trump to escape retribution for his constitutionally criminal acts by attempting to squash the Mueller investigation," at the very least, is an egregious attack on the Constitution and the rule of law.  The other side of the impeach or not to impeach argument is the strategic one that Democrats are struggling with as they vie for the Democratic nomination for President and win in 2020.  

Senator Elizabeth Warren, just came forward with her view that Congress should begin impeachment proceedings forthwith and a few other Democratic candidates have edged up to the same conclusion.  Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has urged caution and has recommended that Congress continue its investigations into Trump and Russian collusion but is not a fan of impeachment for now. 

At risk is one more Trump term as a result of the 2020 Presidential election so the two camps over impeachment is not a throw-away.   The question is "what is the best strategy for ensuring that Trump won't have a second term?"  And in our recent history there is probably no more prescient political question than this one.  You can be assured that despite the awfulness Trump has perpetrated on America during his first term, his second would be far worse. 

As for me, I was a proponent of impeachment as soon and as rigorously as possible.  But I've shifted.  I think that our - liberals and progressives - lust for revenge on Trump has overwhelmed our rational thought processes and blinded us to what is most important - getting rid of Trump as soon as possible and not punishment and revenge no matter how sweet and satisfying this would be.  But it is the Mueller Report that has thrown the "impeach or not impeach" into a whirlwind of confusion.  There is so much evidence in the Mueller Report of Trump's "collusion" and obstruction that Congress can investigate Trump and his minions for decades on both counts. 

But conducting  impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives could turn off voters who voted for Obama in 2008 and 20012 who would see this as a partisan Democratic smear campaign against Trump.  This is the conundrum.  This is the Pandora's Box that could indeed give Trump another four years in the White House.  Yes, for Millennials this is not an issue.  They are totally against Trump but their votes alone cannot determine the outcome of the 2020 election.  It's up to Baby Boomers to determine the outcome.  And they are not as solidly anti-Trump as their younger brethren and sisters.  

The counterargument is that beginning impeachment hearings would energize the electorate and might get all those folks who sat out 2016 back to the polls.  And there is much to say for this view since the 2018 mid-terms resulted in a record turn-out.  Problem is, that with Trump under direct attack, it would also energize his supporters and near-supporters.  

So for all the pluses and minuses surrounding the issue of Trump's impeachment, I have to come down on the side that it is not worth the risk to have the House Judiciary Committee conducting impeachment hearings prior to the 2020 Presidential election.  Let them continue to conduct hearings (remember Benghazi?), issue subpoenas and hear testimony under oath.  And make no mistake, for us liberals and progressives who want Trump hauled off to jail just as soon as possible, there is plenty of time and plenty of evidence that even after he leaves office - preferably voted out - his empire and his reputation will be destroyed given all the spin-offs Robert Mueller has cited in his report.  

Cries of "impeach him now" are tantalizing and have an attraction to all of us who really do hate Trump for all his destructive actions that have gone a long way to undermining our democratic republic.   But we must not give in to emotional irrationality as attractive and satisfying as it feels to us.  Our only strategy at this point is to get rid of Trump as soon as possible and the surest way for this to happen is to make sure that come November 3, 2020, we have a Democratic President-Elect.        

  

Take Care!  

Thus Article IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO?

That's an article IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO? This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.

You are now reading the article IMPEACHMENT: YES OR NO? with the link address https://coneknews.blogspot.com/2019/04/impeachment-yes-or-no.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: