Chicago - A message from the station manager

The [Monday] Papers

By Steve Rhodes

Did President Trump commit high crimes and misdemeanors? Laura Washington never says. Apparently that’s the last thing on her mind when it comes to impeachment.


“Impeachment may offer a short-term gain, but it promises long-term pain: four more years of President Donald Trump.”
This is a rather spurious claim – unless Washington possesses the world’s only functioning crystal ball. And it’s not as if she has a track record indicating she has a particular predictive power.
“An impeachment drive by U.S. House Democrats would cheer Trump haters everywhere. It would humiliate and infuriate the man himself. That would be a beautiful thing to watch. But impeachment also would burn through the Democrats’ political energy and distract vital attention from the 2020 presidential campaign.”
I don’t get this line of reasoning. Trump’s behavior in office is already a campaign issue. It’s going to continue to be a campaign issue. It should be a campaign issue. Not only that, it’s the most urgent issue facing the nation. Democrats should just ignore it? How in the world is the president’s behavior – you know, committing crimes – a distraction instead of the central issue? If not this president, under these circumstances, with the evidence at hand, then which president, when?
“It would make Trump a victim and solidify his base.”
His base is solidified. Not only that, his base isn’t more likely to unsolidify by Democratic persuasion about, say, health care. Besides that, who cares. Sometimes there are issues more vital than a president’s base. The Constitution comes to mind.
“It would also alienate centrist Republican and independent voters who would abhor the partisan circus of an impeachment drive.”
First, there aren’t many centrist Republicans and independents left to abhor. Second, the partisanship is all on the Republican side. The facts aren’t partisan. And they are incontrovertible.
“The ‘Impeach!’ crowd keeps forgetting that winning impeachment in the U.S. House will not remove Trump from the White House.”
Aside from the patronizing use of the word “crowd,” which is commonly used by pundits to point a finger at a group of people holding an unfavorable opinion in order to insinuate that they are just a dumb mob, no one is forgetting that impeachment in the House will not remove Trump from the White House.
“After that, the U.S. Senate must vote to remove Trump from office. There is no chance the lily-livered, Republican-controlled Senate will go there.”
Again with the crystal ball. You never know, once proceedings get underway. More evidence may even come forward. Dynamics change. These things have a way of taking on a momentum of their own. Besides that, so what? If Republicans in the Senate stymie Trump’s removal from office, so be it. That doesn’t justify Democrats abdicating their responsibility to the nation to try their damndest to uphold the rule of law.
“Democrats should focus on getting crucial legislation through Congress and on nominating a presidential opponent who can take Trump out at the polls.”
Of course, the same Senate Republicans who would presumably stand in the way of removing Trump from office are standing in the way of Democratic legislation. And “nominating a presidential opponent who can take Trump out at the polls” is not a decision the party can simply make, as opposed to nominating someone who can’t. Nobody will know if a potential nominee can take out Trump until Election Day.
“A national poll conducted in late May by Hill.TV and the HarrisX research firm found 35% of registered voters supported impeachment proceedings against Trump, compared with 45% who did not. Another 20% said they were unsure or didn’t know. That’s down from a similar survey taken in November, when 40% of registered voters favored impeachment. The voters have it right.”
First, I wouldn’t trust anything coming out of the notorious Hill. Second, that poll was taken before Robert Mueller made his public remarks two weeks ago. Since then, the public’s desire to commence impeachment proceedings have grown, according to an NPR/PBS NewsHour Marist poll.
“A slim majority of Americans (52%) want one of the following: to begin impeachment proceedings (22%), to continue investigations into potential political wrongdoing of Trump (25%) or to publicly reprimand him – that is, censure (5%),” NPR reported just two days ago.
“Thirty-nine percent say no further action should be taken and that the current investigations should end. That is largely reflective of Trump’s base, as Trump maintains a 41% approval rating in the poll . . . ”
“The share that supports beginning impeachment proceedings is up from 16% a month ago – before former special counsel Robert Mueller spoke out about his probe into 2016 Russian election interference and the Trump campaign, but after the release of his report.”
And guess what?
“The growth in support comes from a near doubling of the number of independents who say they want impeachment rather than continuing investigations, publicly reprimanding Trump or taking no further action.”
Emphasis mine.
So far from impeachment being the “sinking ship” that Washington states it is, it’s more like a giant aircraft carrier that just takes a little momentum before it gets fully up to speed. That’s how these things work. Nancy Pelosi knows that. She’s playing it cool to avoid a perception of partisanship by starting with committee investigations. With those results, she may move to impeachment proceedings. She’s being methodical. Not all of us think that’s necessary, but that’s her strategy. There is also more to come out of ongoing investigations in Eastern Virginia and the Southern District of New York.
Advising Democrats to focus their energies on choosing a nominee – how, any more than they already are? – is a cynical, silly and wholly irresponsible position that disregards mountains of evidence about presidential wrongoing. What was the point of Mueller investigating if the results ought to be ignored? What was the point of all that investigative journalism? Should that not have been done?
If the idea was to simply amass evidence to use in a campaign, then that’s the ultimate in partisanship. If the idea was to find the truth, and act on it appropriately, then impeachment proceedings must commence.
–
New on the Beachwood . . .
Remembering Dr. John In Chicago
With a dash of Leon Redbone.
*
The Illustrated Flora Of Illinois
Two new entries in the series.
*
Global Chainsaw Market On Fire
Multiple innovations in features, including horsepower, torque capacities and mobility are expected to increase demand.
–
New from the Beachwood Sports Desk . . .
SportsMonday: It’s Up To Yu, Now
All those good feelings ready to come crashing down at Coors Field tonight.
*
Track Notes: Not Upset At All
Horse racing nearly always exists in circular logic, no pun there to be pardoned.
*
The White Sox Report: Russian Interference
“You may not believe this, but they’re having an election right now to see who gets to play in what they call the All-Star Game . . . ”
–
ChicagoReddit

Expense evening for somebody in Chicago from r/chicago


–
ChicagoGram

View this post on Instagram

#wellsstreetartfestival #chicagoart #chicago #wellssartfestival #art

A post shared by Amiél Cabiling (@insta_miel) on


–
ChicagoTube
Garbage First Met At The Metro.

–
BeachBook
Joanna Stingray, The Woman Who Smuggled Punk Rock Out Of The USSR.

*
Africa’s Lost Kingdoms.

*
Mark Twain’s Portfolio, Part 1: Existential Hedging & The United Fruit Company

*
Sierra Leone, 2000: A Case History In Successful Intervention.

*
Even Keebler Elves Are Trying To Rip You Off.

–
TweetWood
A sampling.


*


*


*
I mean, you wouldn’t publish a poll based on just eight respondents, would you?


*
Ho-hum, the president lies a lot.


–
The Beachwood McRibTipLine: Got beef?

Permalink

Posted on June 10, 2019