Tomfoolery
Some people have too much money. Take Tom Steyer. He's long been a Democratic activist, and now he's spending his dough on a crackpot mission to impeach Donald Trump.
The best line is he wants us to tell Congress "they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right." As if he's got a serious argument, rather than one based on raw politics. And as if not impeaching the President--which is generally how Congress works--is some extreme political stance.
Not that he has no chance. If the Dems can take back the Congress, they might be as nuts as Steyer. But if Steyer truly wants to make a difference, he should do what any self-respecting billionaire would and run for President himself. Hey, if Trump is so awful and he won, it should be a piece of cake, right Tom?
posted by LAGuy @ 11:11 AM
8 Comments:
Interesting suggestion. I don't know much about politics but this does not seem to help build anti-Trump sentiment or specifically to help get Trump impeached. Just one example is reminding us all of the Clinton impeachment, an idea which Americans widely hated if I am remembering correctly.
At least Clinton had committed actual crimes, stuff which got him disbarred. Trump is just a guy they don't like.
Sure, but they dislike him enough that they think he's criminal. Sheesh, anonymous, you sure don't seem to know much about civics.
People didn't hate impeachment- they hated to moral nannies who were trying to impeach him over nothing. Who will defend Trump- the Trump Rump?
People were more sexist in the 90's and considered Clinton's perjury in the deposition of his victim more trivial than they would today. They therefore saw the Republican impeachment as political posturing, which the public gets tired of when there are real problems to be dealt with. In fact, if Clinton's behaviors came to light today after the Weinstein scandals, he'd be forced to resign without impeachment, as they are far more alarming than accusations against Trump.
Even if Dems take the house next year, Trump will not be removed from office unless he really is shown to have committed a high crime. If impeached, the Senate will never convict, and unlike Nixon, Trump can't be shamed into resignation.
Nixon wasn't shamed into resignation. It was made clear to him he'd have to leave one way or another, so he took the more honorable--and easier--way out.
Do you have a recording of the conversation where it was made clear to him that he was going to have to leave? We can't know what was in his mind. It was pretty clear he was going to be impeached. Whether he would have been convicted in the Senate we'll never know. But clearly the national crisis of confidence would have continued through most of the rest of his term.
No one has a recording of the conversation with Nixon, but this is not about what was in his mind, but what people have said since, people who were there at the time.
Any decent journalism that looks at the time will inform you that Nixon understood he'd be removed from office. The Senate would have mustered the necessary votes, with the majority Dems and a fair number of Republicans. The leaders of the GOP spoke to Nixon about this and made it clear to him.
I doubt Nixon would have resigned if he were just worried about a crisis of confidence. In fact, I can't imagine any President doing that.
Post a Comment
<< Home