do donald fraud's actions rise to the level of impeachable offenses? as usual, wrong question.

[unblock]

the framing of issues is tremendously important, and the primary question that gets asked get cause people to fixate on only one aspect of a complex situation while ignoring everything else. this can lead to many problems, such as seemingly intractable disputes and highly unconstructive debates because everyone is talking past each other.

has he committed high crimes and misdemeanors? really, there's no objective doubt that he has. remembering that notwithstanding the legalistic words in "high crimes and misdemeanors", the term really has always simply meant gross inappropriateness for the job. abuse, misuse, or neglect of the powers and duties of the office.

donald fraud has done this in spades from day one. the comparatively petty pecuniary actions, such as steering business (both government and foreign) to his private businesses is really an open and shut case, though the list of impeachable offenses is vastly longer and grows by the day.

lest anyone think i'm making a mountain out of a molehill just on the basis of emoluments and/or profiting off secret service stays at his hotels, remember that hillary would certainly be impeached over a similar thing. remember how they went after her for making a small profit over a few futures trades? remember how they went after her for some donations to her charities?


anyway, point is, it's the wrong question.

has he committed impeachable offenses? hell yes, of course.
should he be impeached and removed and barred from future office? hell yes, of course.

but the real question is not what he deserves.

the real question is: has our government been rendered too corrupt, too servile, too inept to actually do what good governance demands?

if we had a functioning senate that cared about governance, he would be removed inside a week. we're really beyond the point where republicans gave up on nixon. nixon didn't last two years after his electoral crimes in 1972.


so the question for the house is not about doing the right thing. if the senate were functional, the right thing would be obvious: impeach and remove. the real question for the house is how do we keep republicans/russians from further corrupting it, and how do we restore sufficient integrity into the system so that we have a properly functioning democratic republic again?

impeachment, at the right time, is likely a very important part of that; certainly investigations will be.

but they are a means to a vastly more important end.

[coti]

1. Dems shining more light on McConnell's corrupt and dysfunctional Senate could be helpful nt

[unblock]

3. the media doing the same would be helpful too....

[rzemanfl]

4. Gotta look for some socks. BBS. n/t

[mr_lebowski]

2. This ... (nt)

[Wounded Bear]

5. Trump and the Repubs WANT Dems to act emotionally and rashly...

That inflates their base. They can say that we're just a reflection of their hate for all things Dems. The could use the old "they're just like us" and discourage more of the both-siders out there from going out and voting.

People misunderstand the meaning of the "turn the other cheek" lesson of Bible fame. Certainly, Trump has never done that. But the bigger lesson is to not react the way they want us to react. It is not about ignoring transgressions, it is about controlling one's own actions. The important thing to do is to react smartly, to not just stoop to their level and respond with violence. That is what they want. It would justify their actions. Bullies always want their victims to react violently. They know that they will win more often than not if you engage them on their turf.

We need to "turn the other cheek" to Trump and overcome him with the full and righteous force of law and legislative power. That would be the biggest defeat of his sad, sick, bloated life, that he could not manipulate the legal system to his advantage.

Will we win? I certainly hope so, but I don't want to "win" by turning into a leftist version of the Trumplodytes. That would be a loss.

[world wide wally]

6. His compulsive lying alone would be reason enough to impeach the fraud

[cstanleytech]

7. How? By retaking the Senate and then ramming through new laws like the Repugnants did

though ours would be ethics ones that apply to anyone in the federal government no matter what branch of it they are in which they must obey with harsh mandatory minimum prison sentences for violating them.
Should the Repugnants then retake the Senate or House they would have a hard time repealing those laws without major backlash.

[unblock]

8. So much will need to be done long after he's out of office.

Money, especially hidden and foreign money, need to be out of politics. Ethics and disclosures shouldn't be optional. Voting rights and systems need to be universal and secure.