The Necessary, Kabuki-Theater Impeachment

Partisanship has grown so powerful that Nixon would probably survive Watergate today. Impeach Trump anyway.

By
6

The president of the United States is likely to be impeached today (and may be impeached by the time you read this newsletter), and outside of America’s subculture of political hobbyists, nobody seems to care. It still matters, though, and it’s still important to lay down a marker—even if the nation is replaying 1998, but with the partisan roles reversed. But let’s not focus entirely on the president. Bernie Sanders is surprisingly resilient in the Democratic primary, so it’s time to ask him: Why are so many anti-Semites orbiting his campaign? 

Today’s French Press:

  1. If we hope to maintain any tattered shreds of political dignity, impeach this president.

  1. There are some bad, bad people in the Bernie Sanders camp.

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
6
By
Comments (6)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Kevin Durant?

    “They’ve erased lines upholding basic competence and fundamental human decency. They’ve erased lines against serial, intentional presidential lies. They’re unfazed when multiple close associates of the president have proven to be crooks and criminals.”
    ————————————-
    I blame Mitt Romney and friends for all of this. All you had to do was attack the media and attack the motives of Democrats just a little bit and it would have quenched the bloodlust

    You couldn’t do it though. When Joe Biden said you wanted to put people in chains you had to respond with “oh Joe there you go again”. You couldn’t call him a despicable race hustler (he is). You couldn’t trash the media as an unethical bunch of leftist hacks who cannot be trusted (they are). You just couldn’t bring yourself to say it

    We tried to make it obvious. I would have thought Newt Gingrich getting a 12 minute standing ovation for an off handed comment about how the media is biased would tip you off. Nope

    You forced us to visit this whorehouse. We are here because of you. How hard is it really to clap back when someone says ‘means testing’ is the equivalent of pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off a cliff??

    People don’t like Trump because he fights more. They like him because he because he at least makes an attempt at fighting. He goes too far and it’s dumb but he’s trying which is better than not trying

    All of this is underlying the whole confusing and weird Sohrab situation. The bottom line is that Sohrab just wants the drag queens to be buried in lawsuits like the cake shop. Neither claim has any legitimacy but the cake shop has 50 lawsuits and the drag queens operate with impunity free from baseless harassment. We want baseless harassment!!!

    Of course David’s position on all of these issues is morally correct and rationally superior. Good luck succeeding in politics with morals and rationality

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Jenny

    Question. What do you conservatives make out of the Democrats not going through the courts to compel Bolton, Mulvaney, and the others to testify? I think President Trump clearly has earned impeachment, but I think the Dems screwed this up terrifically by not going through the correct process to force these folks to weigh in.


    Another question. Is it possible to jump the lower courts and go right to the Supreme Court to have them decide whether or not these people have to comply with subpoenas? While I'm not going all-in on this idea, I wonder if it would be helpful to modify the rules to be able to fast-track some cases to the Supreme Court that we know are bound to end up there?

    Really, in what world wouldn't the administration appeal if a lower court said it had to answer the subpoenas? Of course it would move to the highest court in the land before it allowed these people to testify! It's not been explained to me well why the Democrats are not waiting to hear from these witnesses before voting on impeachment. What am I not understanding?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      David French

      Jenny, I think the Democrats should have gone through the courts, and while you can try to jump to SCOTUS, the Supreme Court is highly unlikely to skip the normal process simply because an election is looming. I'd say they probably don't want to decide the legal issues right before an election. I think Count 1 on impeachment (abuse of power) is very solid. Count 2 (obstruction of Congress) is less solid for the reasons you outline.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Jenny

        So why do you think the Dems are not waiting for the courts before going all in on impeachment? Again, I totally think the president is in the wrong, but I'm dissapointe the Dems have managed to mess this up. I wish it were not so, but I bet Trump manages to make impeachment work for him.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Kevin Durant?

      I believe the calculation is that it is supremely unlikely that any of the documents the court requires to be produced would contain proof of a corrupt scheme and any potentially damaging communications would be deemed protected by executive privilege

      In other words, whatever official OMB paperwork Mulvaney filled out almost certainly does not contain the phrase “withhold until we get dirt on Biden” and the conversation where Trump told Mulvaney “withhold until we get dirt on Biden” is protected by executive privilege

      Better to pretend there is a smoking gun that you can’t get access to because of Orange Man tyranny than it is to search for the smoking gun under the rules dictated by the Supreme Court and come up empty

      Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Isaac P

    Ironic, that Trump would be well-equipped to draw the lines, but he only uses his Sharpie to obfuscate.

    Collapse