"Impeachment"
Sydney M. Williams
Thought of the Day
“Impeachment”
November 7, 2019
“Why not amend the
Constitution so that any President
who is impeached and
acquitted is permitted to serve a third term?”
William
Mattox
“Impeachment
Needs a Replay Booth”
Wall
Street Journal, October 23, 2019
Like most clever but sensible suggestions
for Congress – the elimination of frivolous impeachment attempts – Mr. Mattox’s
proposal will never be adopted. It makes too much sense for a Congress that
prefers political theater to judiciously carrying out their responsibilities as
legislators.
The American journalist and satirist
H.L. Mencken once wrote: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the
people alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series
of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” And the granddaddy of all
hobgoblins is impeachment, at least here in the fourth quarter of 2019, a year
from a presidential election that will see the most vilified President we have
ever had run against one of the most far-left leaning candidates ever nominated.
“Fasten your seat belts; it’s going to be a bumpy night,” said Bette
Davis in the 1951 movie “It’s All About Eve.”
For us Americans, it will be a bumpy year.
Cynicism fills the air. Politicians
live by scruples known only to themselves. Their concern is their own welfare
and that of their party. Their goal is power. That end justifies whatever means
or processes are felt necessary to achieve it. Yet, they wrap themselves in
cloaks of righteous indignation. “Every member should support allowing the
American people to hear the facts for themselves…this is nothing less than our
democracy.” Stirring but hypocritical words spoken by House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi, as she allowed Adam Schiff, Chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee to conduct impeachment hearings – hearings held in secret, where
Republicans were not allowed to call witnesses and to which Mr. Trump’s lawyers
were banned from attending. Schiff and the media have made much of diplomats
fired, like the former ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. Do they forget
that elections have consequences? Foreign policy is the responsibility of the
President and changing ambassadors is expected and common.
The imbroglio of impeachment reminds
one of Alice’s adventures in court over the case of the missing tarts. When the
King asked the jury to consider their verdict. “No, no said the Queen.
Sentence first – verdict afterwards.” What we are witnessing is a farce,
but one with sobering consequences that, at best, will rebound to impale she
(or he) who wields the sword when party leadership next changes, and at worst
will damage our democratic Republic. In a recent op-ed in “The Hill,” Alan
Dershowitz wrote that a foresighted Alexander Hamilton had warned that the
decision to move forward with impeachment will be “more regulated by the
comparative strength of parties than the real demonstrations of innocence or
guilt.” John Durham, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut and
now investigating the special counsel’s probe into Russian interference in the
2016 election, spoke in March 2018 at the University of St. Joseph in West
Hartford, CT: “One thing that I try to bear in mind, and try to encourage in
new young prosecutors, particularly those who are making their bones or cutting
their teeth, is an awareness of the incredible power that is wielded by law
enforcement, and perhaps federal law enforcement in particular. Issuing a
subpoena can destroy someone’s reputation. It can damage their business, hurt
their families. It is an awesome power that we have, that should only be used
in appropriate instances.” Wise words that should be heeded by powerful agencies
like the IRS, the Justice Department and the EPA, as well as by members of
Congress, especially the latter, as they satiate a lust for revenge that had
its genesis in hatred.
In the recent vote to formally launch
an impeachment investigation, the fact that not one Republican voted with the
majority suggests that Hamilton’s concern is real. Looking at the three
previous impeachments – Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton – two
were acquitted (Johnson and Clinton) and Mr. Nixon resigned, as he likely would
have been convicted, as his was a crime that could be deemed nonpolitical. The
attack on Mr. Trump has been political from the GetGo, as the Resistance began
before he took office. The Russian probe came to naught, as did attempts by
Stormy Daniels and others to discredit him. The odor from Ukraine has more of a
Biden smell than a Trump aroma. Unlike some Republicans when attacked, Mr.
Trump fights back, a response that has surprised a Left used to submissive
opponents.
The Left would have us believe that
any defense of Trump is a “defense of the indefensible,” a phrase that
has a nice ring, but one which has no applicability in this instance, as the
aggressor has been for three years the Resistance, comprised of those who do
not believe Mr. Trump deserves the Presidency, that he did not win fairly, that he is dangerous and unqualified, a potential
dictator. What these detractors fail to see is their own, undemocratic behavior
– using intelligence bureaucracies to find dirt on Mr. Trump, conducting
closed-door meetings to which Republicans are barred, denying freedom of speech
on social media and in universities, curtailing freedoms of religious
expression. A government that wants to regulate one’s behavior is one that is
dangerous to liberty. Which Party wants to provide Medicare for all, free
college and cradle-to-grave care? As attractive as those programs sound, they
come with a cost, not just in dollars, but more importantly in freedoms
foregone. As Kimberly Strassel wrote in her new book Resistance: “Tyrants
don’t get rid of rules; they pile them on.” Love him or hate him, President
Trump has rolled back regulations, providing more freedom to individuals, not
less. It is not he who is a threat to liberty.
There will always be extremists in a
nation of 330 million people – psychos that represent the far right and the far
left. They need to be watched, but they don’t represent the real risks to our
democratic Republic. It is when extremism infiltrates mainstream thinking we
have to worry, and that is what we are seeing in the resistance to Donald
Trump. I have often expressed my dismay at Mr. Trump’s character, his Tweets,
his rudeness and his profanity. But he does not represent a threat to our
Country. If coarse language speaks louder than positive deeds, then criticism
of Mr. Trump is warranted. But if mellifluous words disguise odious actions,
then it is the Left that bears watching. The media have their eyes Right,
leaving the Left unguarded. They are enamored by the “wokeness” of progressive
politicians, with their political correctness and identity politics, by the
charisma of Hollywood and late-night TV talk-show hosts, and with ivory tower-ensconced
social justice warriors in our universities.
Impeachment is but the latest attempt
to destroy the man who was elected in 2016, the most investigated President we
have ever had. In hanging Russian collusion around his neck in January 2017,
the Resistance thought they had him. Two years later, the Mueller Report found
no collusion. The whole idea that Putin would have preferred the mercurial
Donald Trump whom he did not know to Hillary Clinton whom he knew well and whom
he had handled successfully never made sense. That Mr. Trump is boorish lent
credibility to the belief he was chauvinistic, but, again, nothing
incriminating was found. The conversation with Ukraine President Volodymyr
Zelensky, while Trumpian, was harmless and not unlike conversations other
Presidents have had with their counterparts over the years. Albert Einstein
defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over.” That seems to
define Democrats in Congress today, in their search for a grail that contains
evidence implicating Mr. Trump in some impeachable offense.
Impeachment is a distraction to a
people who must decide what sort of country they want – Socialism, with its
costs in dollars and lost freedoms, or free market capitalism, which offers the
social and economic escalator of opportunity that takes people up and down. For
all of our sakes, I hope they choose the latter.
Labels: Alan Dershowitz, Albert Einstein, Bette Davis, H.L. Mencken, John Durham, Kimberly Strassel, Lewis Carroll, Marie Yovanovitch, Volodymyr Zelensky, William Mattox
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home