Van Drew was one of only two Democrats who broke ranks with House leaders and opposed an impeachment inquiry over accusations that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden. Trump denies the allegations and has called the inquiry a "hoax."
While he considers the president's actions regarding Ukraine as "unsavory," the congressman said he has yet to learn of anything that would persuade him Trump did something to warrant removal from office.
No president has ever been removed from office, Van Drew, 66, points out. And to have a "small, elite group" of lawmakers do so when an election is less than a year away seems to him to be not only unfathomable, but un-American.
This is really a very respectable line of reasoning for anyone running in a purple, red, or even a light blue state. When put into the perspective that you are attempting to use the articles of impeachment to remove a sitting President (less than a year from reelection) for the first time in our nation's history, well then it better be for something that there isn't any disagreement over.
At this point in time, Democrats have failed to convince many Americans that what the President is accused of doing is even a criminal action, which should be the lowest bar required to actually remove a sitting President. Continuously running deep state anti-Trump actor after deep state anti-Trump actor to disagree with his policy choices, or to suggest that he acted inappropriately makes a mockery of the seriousness of what impeachment should stand for.
The reality is that this is a President who is less than a year away from the American voters making a determination as to whether or not he should continue to be President. Short of something with overwhelming bi-partisan agreement involved, impeachment shouldn't even be considered. That "something" (in question) shouldn't be an action that doesn't even have any political consensus as to whether or not it qualifies as a wrongdoing, much less any legal consensus that it is any sort of criminal action.
To be clear, if you have to use the term "corrupt intent" to prove something is a crime, it means that the action itself is actual legal. When you redefine something from what it is (setting terms and conditions) and call it something more malicious (such as Bribery) because a focus group told you to, well then you don't really have a real case to go forward with.
Moreover, the Democrats have fallen down to arguing the fallacy of a false dilemma, by attempting to convince people that there are only two choices. He either did "nothing wrong" or he did "something wrong and must be impeached". They are attempting to "shame" people into impeachment by suggesting any opposition to removing a duly elected President for the first time in history, can be viewed as a suggestion that the President acted "perfectly" and did nothing wrong.
They seem to reject the principle use by Van Drew (and many others) that just because you disagree with what the President did, or don't completely agree that it was appropriate, that impeachment is not the answer. Democrats seem to want to pretend that there are no other options involved. If you did something wrong (jay walking) you must pay the ultimate consequences (death penalty), no matter how ridiculous the correlation actually is.
Make no mistake... impeaching the President because a handful of deep state actors disagreed with his policies, and believed he behaved in an inappropriate manner does not warrant a death penalty. It probably doesn't warrant a censure. It likely doesn't even warrant a hearing.
This is why you will not see any real breaking of the ranks on the Republican side... but why you still may end up seeing several Democrats fleeing from the stench of the fake impeachment hearings.
10 comments:
Let the investigations continue. Let Trump let his own advisors and former advisors testify. (He's been complaining they couldn't.) Let subpoenas be enforced. Let him expose the secrets of his tax returns.
We'll see, we'll see.
You can't fool the people all of the time, said Lincoln.
I sure can try, says Trump.
House Will Review Impeachment Report Monday
“Members of the House Intelligence Committee will begin reviewing a report Monday on the panel’s investigation of President Trump’s efforts to press Ukraine to investigate his Democratic adversaries, a crucial step in the House’s fast-moving impeachment inquiry,” Politico reports.
“Lawmakers on the panel will get a 24-hour review period… On Tuesday, the panel is expected to approve the findings — likely on a party-line vote — teeing it up for consideration by the Judiciary Committee, which is in turn expected to draft and consider articles of impeachment in the coming weeks.”
this is hilarious.
democrats promised us a bi-partisan impeachment, and so far what we're getting is bi-partisan OPPOSITION to impeachment.
heh.
Yep, no spinning the Defeat of the Socialist Democrats.
First the Lying Socialist said they would be done by Thanksgiving , now by Christmas.
I like Christmas nice gift for Trump , a Yuge Win over Socialist Democrat .
Todd pushed back against Kennedy’s claim, accusing him of parroting a Moscow talking point. , “This entire effort to frame Ukraine for the Russian meddling of 2016, of which you just made this case that they’ve done it, that actually this is an effort of Russia propaganda, that this is a Russian intelligence propaganda campaign in order to get people like you to say these things about Ukraine,” Todd said. “Are you at all concerned you are doing Russian intelligence work here?”
Kennedy then called on Todd to “read the articles,” saying that “they’re very well documented.” He acknowledged that “Russia was very aggressive” and is “much more sophisticated” but that “does not exclude the fact that President Poroshenko actively worked for Secretary Clinton.” Todd responded in an exasperated tone, seemingly dumbfounded by what he was hearing. “You realize that the only other person selling this argument outside of the United States is Vladimir Putin,” Todd said. “You have done exactly what the Russian operation is trying to get American politicians to do. Are you at all concerned that you have been duped?
Scott A**hole has been duped by the President.
Kennedy is an alleged scholar.....he sounded like cramps, the goat fucker and Paula combined!!!! Abjectly stupid and his cites are a bigger pile of bullshit than he is!!!! Sad how low another has gone to validate Putin and deny it!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAA!@!!
What Todd is not saying is that the accusations are false.
Todd is upset that a media narrative is not taken as fact. His question is basically "how many times does this have to be repeated before it is considered fact". Whether this is repeated by the Media or by deep state anti-Trump player, they can repeat it till they are blue in the face.
This "exasperates" people like Todd who are increasingly frustrated at their lack of public persuasion.
The answer is that it will "never" be taken as fact until there are serious investigations into why Ukraine itself found two Ukrainian citizens guilty of illegal interference into the 2016 US Presidential election.
Post a Comment