skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Bottom line … there are two possible outcomes of today’s action in the US House of Representatives;
The House may vote to impeach the Current Occupant of the White House, on a largely party-line vote. The Senate will fail in its duty to conduct a meaningful trial, and the C.O. will retain his office. His behavior will become even more juvenile, vindictive, and criminal than it has been; comfortable in the impunity provided by the results in the Senate. Republicans will claim that the fact that none of them voted to impeach is proof that this is a partisan impeachment process – but the reality is simply that their party discipline makes them accessories-after-the-fact for Trump’s criminality. Enough people will buy the Republican line that many key battleground states may well go to Trump in the next election.
The other possibility is that enough Democrats ignore the clear evidence presented to them, and fear for their reelection—or recognize the futility of passing this on to the Senate, only for it to die there—and vote against impeachment, killing the process here. The Republican fable about the partisan nature of the accusations, and the acceleration of Trump’s misbehavior will be exactly the same as in the first scenario. In addition, the Democrats will face the perception that they are too weak and fragmented to uphold the law. This would likely be even more costly among voters in battleground states.
So, which is the correct action?
I feel that it is the duty of the House to pass these articles of impeachment, calling out the criminality of this man, despite the certainty that there will be no enforcement action by the Senate. We owe it to posterity that a meaningful response to these offenses be written into history – whatever the consequences. Failure to act in the face of obvious guilt encourages further offenses, lies to the future, and diminishes the role of congress as a co-equal branch of government
There needs to be a trial in the Senate, even though the chances of the Current Occupant’s conviction and removal from office are vanishingly slight.
It may be impossible at this point to prevent our nation from descending into an extended period of darkness, but the historical record of this time—and of those who endeavor today to prevent or slow this descent must be preserved. It may not bubble back to public consciousness in this country in our lifetimes, but this must be documented for the rest of the world, and for posterity.
When we have a normal, healthy admiration for a leader or other public figure, evidence that they are incompetent, corrupt, or otherwise unfit will compromise our support, and threaten those bonds of admiration.
It’s different when we have given over a portion of our identity to the one we admire. When that occurs, revelations of that person’s corruption may be perceived as a threat not just to the other, but to our judgment; even to ourselves. It is a natural reaction, in this situation, to try to minimize these revelations.
In the extreme, people may have entirely subsumed their identity into that of their leader. Accusations are felt deeply and personally – and rejected at a wall of cognitive dissonance. Counterintuitively, the more serious the charge—and the clearer and more undeniable the evidence—the more they are rejected, and the more closely these followers will cleave to their leader.
Leaders may cynically lock down their hold on followers by intentionally making absurd statements, then repeating them incessantly. This serves two purpose with followers; as a loyalty test, and as a training tool, to reduce their will question anything their leader says.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
- Voltaire
