After Nancy Pelosi's recent statement, "Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country, and he's just not worth it."
We have in office a President who lies incessantly. A President who lies when the truth will suffice. A President so loosely glued to reality as to deny what he just said in front of a room filled with cameras and recording equipment. While it is true that all Presidents lie due to conflicting positions and national security this President makes up imaginary issues and then tells lies about them. There is no historical precedent for this President, not Nero or King George can come close.
There are currently seventeen ongoing investigations of the President and his administration. The Mueller investigation seeks to prove if the President and his campaign conspired with a hostile foreign power to subvert the will of the America people and the American form of government. Some might call it treason, Pelosi says it must be compelling and overwhelming.
This is a President who has withdrawn the US from the Paris Climate Accords. A nuclear arms treaty and treaty with Iran. A President who has gone out of his way to insult and demean our major allies while he is cozying up to third word dictators and somehow Ms. Pelosi is worried about divisive. The President defends Mr. Bone Saw and calls Nazis "fine people." Pelosi is trying to catch flies with a tennis racket. She's trying to stay dignified and Congressional, knowing 2020 looks more attractive with Bozo in office than in court.
Michael Cohen says he has an e-mail promising a pardon that's obstruction of justice. The firing of Comey is obstruction of justice. The firing of Sessions is obstruction of justice. Trumps leading Tweets suggest witness tampering. The Moscow Trump Tower talks, and Trump Tower meetings suggest treason. Just how much more compelling an overwhelming should it get? The FBI headquarters scandal, the emollients charges, just what do you have to do to get impeached in this country?
The President in a fit of pique shuts down the government for a month because right wing radio hosts thumped his nose and took him to task. Not for a Constitutional or humanitarian principle but because he didn't get his way. After spending his first two years passing an obscene undeserved and unwarranted tax cut for big business the President throws down the gauntlet over his wall. Like a spoiled child discovering an even better toy he throws a tantrum. Oblivious of Constitutional norms and lacking even in common sense.
He complains bitterly about Saturday Night Live and late-night talk show hosts demeaning and belittling him. He calls the press and enemy of the people unaware that journalism is the only Constitutionally protected line of work. The administration fabricates and manufactures incidents to prove their point which almost universally blow up in their faces. The President announces the US is pulling out of Syria to the shock and amazement of his own military advisers.
than two years the President is unable to cobble together a coherent
administration. The turn over rate rivals McDonald's and only equals it in
caliber. Positions go unfilled so as not to encumber the President's "Executive
time." A President who makes
announcements via Twitter, what could possibly go wrong? What we have here"is a
failure to communicate. What we have here is an administration that puts
children in cages. What we have here is an administration which seeks money
from Congress to build concentration camps. Always the Capitalist, Trump wants
to build privately operated government funded concentration camps. Privately
operated publicly funded concentration camps which if prosecuted at Nuremberg would earn you a gallows noose.
The first Constitutional Convention ignored the issue of slavery because it would divide a country so newly united. Neville Chamberlain ignored Hitler's crimes and signed the agreement with the Nazis dividing up Czechoslovakia. He feared being divisive and was attempting to be bipartisan. At a dinner held during the Yalta Conference Stalin proposed executing fifty thousand Nazis. Winston Churchill angrily replied, "No sir, not one!" Didn't he realize he was being divisive? Franklin Roosevelt tried to calm the Prime Minister joking, "Alright then, forty-nine thousand." Again, Churchill replied, "No sir, not one!" Clearly the British Prime Minister didn't understand the meaning of bipartisanship.
If I were King of the world, I could run through the court dockets dispensing with justice by deciding which court cases weren't worth it. The Speaker of the House oversteps her bounds, it is up to the courts to decide whether it is worth it or not. Stalin's plan for Nazi retribution would have been much more efficient the job could have been done in weeks. Instead, the Allies held trials and the defendants were provided with council. Obviously, the Nazi inner circle were guilty of crimes against humanity and most were rightly hanged. But they weren't hanged out of vengeance or anger but out of moral righteousness and the civilization of mankind.
The Nazi henchman's names fade into obscurity but the principals for which they were hanged remain bright and vibrant. It is not for the crowd or potentates to decide who is prosecuted. It is not for electoral advantage or monetary gain to decide who is prosecuted. It is the law which decides who is prosecuted. At some point we have to stop in the face of all which the last two and a half years has put on display. To ask over selves, if in the face of all we have seen, the incompetence, the cruelty and the disregard of American principles, when does not prosecuting become itself a criminal act?
Politics is a dirty business and Bill Clinton was impeached over lying about a blow job. Republicans were seen as persecuting a flawed but otherwise competent President and it cost them at the ballot box. Is it possible Speaker Pelosi fears the same? Is it possible that Congressional Republicans and Democrats can take a laze fare, boys will be boys' approach for the subversion of American Democracy? The power which they take for themselves to decide which principles of the Constitution just aren't worth the trouble?