The Coup In Progress: Presidential Impeachment/Removal Plans

I am finally devoting a dedicated post  to this list, in part because I am sick of searching for the thing every time I want to reference it. I will eventually deposit the list along with the Apology Scale and the Rationalizations List as another separate page in the “Rule Book” to your right.

One note on the use of the term coup. Some media pundits, their hands already bloodied, have been making the sophist claim that what has been going on since November 2016 isn’t a coup under the dictionary definition, which requires violence and usually a military take-over. Using cover-terms and euphemisms is a form of lying, and it is an especially common practice from  the Left right now, though the Right has its moments.

A “soft coup,” also known as a silent coup, does not use violence, and is typically based on a conspiracy or plot  aimed at seizing power, overthrowing existing legal authority, exchanging political leadership, changing the political system or the current institutional order. We are watching a long-running soft coup. A soft coup is still a coup.

There have been 19 Plans to abuse various processes, laws and theories, all put forward and promoted by members of the Democratic Party/”resistance”/mainstream news media alliance since President Trump’s election.  The  desired effect of this barrage, apart from serving the goal of removing him without the bother (and risk) of an election,  has been to make it impossible for the President to govern, and to destroy his support among the public.

When Plan S, which late novelist Robert Ludlum might have called “The Ukrainian Perversion” if it had been one of his novels, fails like the rest, or if President Trump is re-elected, the list will keep growing.

The List:

Plan A: Reverse the election by hijacking the Electoral College. Theory: The elected President is unfit for office and the Founders would have hated him

Plan B: Pre-emptive impeachment. Theory: The elected President had already committed impeachable crimes before he even ran for office, and also while he was running for office.

Plan C : The Emoluments Clause. Theory: An obscure constitutional provision that had never been used, never been understood to apply to businesses owned by the Chief Executive, and which should have been raised, if at all, during the campaign, now disqualified Trump from the Presidency.

Plan D: “Collusion with Russia” Theory: The Trump campaign, with his knowledge, had a deal with Russia to sabotage Hillay Clinton in exchange for policy rewards after Trump’s election.

Plan E : ”Trump is mentally ill so this should trigger the 25th Amendment.” Theory: The old Soviet theory that anyone who disagrees with the authority, in this case, progressives, must be crazy.

Plan F: The Maxine Waters Plan, which  is to just impeach the President because Democrats want to, because they can. Theory: “Orange Man Bad!”

Plan G : “The President obstructed justice by firing incompetent subordinates, and that’s impeachable.” Theory: An intentionally distorted version of “obstruction of justice.”

Plan H: “Tweeting stupid stuff is impeachable.” Theory: “Orange Man Bad!”

Plan I:  “Let’s relentlessly harass him and insult him and obstruct his efforts to do his job so he snaps and does something really impeachable.” Theory: Self-explanatory.

Plan J : Force Trump’s resignation based on alleged sexual misconduct that predated his candidacy. Theory: Orange Man Bad!”

Plan K: Election law violations in pay-offs to old sex-partners. Theory: A creative and unprecedented interpretation of election laws,

Plan L: The perjury trap: get Trump to testify under oath, then prove something he said was a lie. Theory: It worked with Clinton!

Plan M: Guilt by association. Prove close associates or family members violated laws. Theory: Orange Man Bad!”.

Plan N: Claim that Trump’s comments at his press conference with Putin were “treasonous.” Theory: Presidents can be impeached for what they say in a diplomatic context.

Plan O: The Mueller Report proves the Trump is unfit for office even if it did not conclude that he committed any impeachable offenses. Theory: Orange Man Bad!”

Plan P:  “We have to impeach him because he’s daring us to and if we don’t, we let him win!”  Theory: Orange Man is SO bad, that any reason to impeach him is good enough.

Plan Q: Impeach Trump to justify getting his taxes, and then use the presumed evidence in his taxes to impeach him. Theory: Salem, Massachusetts Bay colony, 17th Century.

Plan R: Rep. Adam Schiff announced on July 24 that President Trump should be impeached because he is “disloyal” to the country.  Theory: “Orange Man Bad, and we’re getting desperate!”

Plan S: Trump should be impeached because his call to Ukrainian President Zelensky was really an effort to shake down the Ukraine and force it to “find dirt” on Joe Biden, thus “interfering” in the 2020 election even though Biden hasn’t been nominated (and won’t be), even though a President has every justification to seek evidence of a prior administration’s wrongdoing in foreign relations, and even though there isn’t a whiff of a threat of quid pro quo in the only transcript of the call, and though such implied Presidential pressure for favors large and trivial are standard practice. Theory: What other Presidents have done for over two-hundred years are impeachable when Trump uses his power similarly.

27 thoughts on “The Coup In Progress: Presidential Impeachment/Removal Plans

  1. ”even though a President has every justification to seek evidence of a prior administration’s wrongdoing in foreign relations”

    If it’s already been mentioned here I missed it, but there does exist a treaty between The Ukraine & the good ol’ U. S. of A. regarding cooperation in investigating criminal matters and for Prosecuting Crimes.

    Was signed into law by then President Clinton while Biden was in the Senate.

  2. The “resistance” is demonizing of the President of the United States for insisting that the House of Representatives follow basic principles of due process, legal procedure, and House rules and precedence; the resistance is calling it obstructing justice, of course they’re idiots. The President of the United States has Constitutional rights both as a citizen of the United States and as the President of the United States and the Washington DC Democrat’s current inquisition is infringing upon those rights. The ends justifies the means to these Washington DC Democrats, what they’ve been doing is unethical and wrong and the President of the United States was correct in standing up against a tyrannical inquisition that was improperly started. The Washington DC Democrats hate Trump so much and they are so damned certain that Trump is guilty of “something” that they are willing to go to any lengths to achieve their goal regardless of collateral damage to the United States political system. They have been actively in search of that fleeting crime since before Trump took office, what they have been doing IS a soft coup.

    I hope this faux impeachment process forces the whole truth to come out in fair due process, but I’m not sure I trust the Washington DC Democrats to do anything related to President Trump fairly. Remember, as the list above shows, they’ve got a track record at playing a dangerous game of the boy who cried wolf since the election in 2016.

    • I hope this faux impeachment process forces the whole truth to come out in fair due process, but I’m not sure I trust the Washington DC Democrats to do anything related to President Trump fairly.

      And well you should not, because they aren’t going to. Worse, I don’t expect any “truth” to come out of Washington, because the entrenched bureaucracy will find ways to impede or pervert it.

      Oh, and neither the media nor the Democrats have paid any price at all for repeatedly and falsely crying “wolf.” There is no reason whatever for them, from a consequences standpoint, to stop doing it. So I don’t expect them to.

  3. Thank you for the coup and soft coup expositions, that was excellent. Now, if only someone would read it…

    This is a great list. I wonder if you will get past Z before the next election? At the rate we are going, I’d say there is a fair chance you will.

  4. The resistance has begun to shift their rhetoric, quid pro quo is becoming bribery. Monkey see, monkey do; let’s see how long it takes for this rhetorical shift to infect the resistance hive.

    Progressives are all in, they can’t stop their momentum now, it’s all or nothing for them, and much of the political left is following them like sheep. Progressives are willing to sacrifice everything, the United States, the Constitution, civility, peace, everything, to rid themselves of President Trump and anyone that supports him. Make no mistake about it what’s going on is a coup d’état that’s currently without the use of violence and on the surface the coup d’état appears to be against Trump and his supporters but this is just their means to an end, they want to fundamentally change the United States and turn it into a totalitarian state. They actually hate the people that are standing in their way to achieve their end goals. Their hate of their opposition, the people, has completely consumed them, the ends justify any means, there’s no turning back, there is no grey area for progressives – either you’re with them or you’re against them.

    • …either you’re with them or you’re against them.

      They will soon learn that there is no such thing as a ‘Pure Ikarran.’*

      To their eternal shame.

      .
      ..

      * I place a bounty of +10 bonus points on this phrase, if anyone can name the cultural reference and explain the background without Google.**

      Hint: it fits the cancel culture situation we have been observing quite well.

      ** The author will be paying this out of his own pocket, as he full well knows there is no budget for such… frippery. -editors***

      ***The editors should have read my contract before commenting: I am budgeted such ‘frippery.’ Perhaps the editors can cut back on those two martini lunches they treat each other to. (Sigh) One more reason journalism is going down the tubes: editors who won’t abide by rules from days gone by**** -author

      ****Both the author and the editors have been counseled about airing dirty laundry in public like this. There will be no more back and forth! – HR*****

      *****HR can bite me: I am a freelance contract employee. They need me more than I need them, and they know it! …I don’t have to sit here and be insulted by the likes of this bunch… there are thousands of people just dying to insult me… -author

    • Steve,

      “Currently without the use of violence” is a key phrase. Ten years ago, your statements may have gotten a derisive snort and a mumbled, “Yeah, whatever…” from me. But that was then. For the first time in my life, I’m actually a bit concerned about the 2020 election. Should the President survive Plan S – and he probably will – the Left will be VERY angry at the Republicans who kept him in office. And should the President survive the other plans that are added – I’m sure Democrats are licking their chops at getting his IRS information – and be re-elected a second time…?

      And if the President is defeated by a Democrat challenger? Will those with violent tendencies believe they are free to act on their baser desires?

      I don’t know…I wish I could say your response is extreme and hysterical, but it doesn’t feel that way any longer.

  5. Why does the word “investigation” mean different things depending on how it is used by the same people?

    If Trump requests an investigation it means an order to dig up or fabricate negative information on an individual to benefit him politically

    When Schiff et al refer to their “investigations” they define them as apolitical searches for the truth.

    My opinion is that when someone uses the same term to mean two different things, one that paints their acts as the most honorable while the other portrays their opponents in the worst possible terms, they are dishonest and cannot be trusted.

    This brings me to the media. The media continue to not push back on the claim that the House has oversight – meaning supervisory – power over the Executive branch. My understanding is that the House has oversight of various departments to ensure their legislation is carried out and the the monies appropriated are used for the legislated purpose. The idea that the Executive must acquiesce to Congress or be held to be obstructing Congress is ludicrous. If the Congress wants the Executive branch to submit to their demands we have a judicial branch to sort out the dispute. Challenging Congressional demands is not obstruction otherwise a veto could be an impeachable offense.

    The Constitution gives no power to the House to set foreign policy so where does it get the power to assess whether any of the President’s emmisaries is causing interference in foreign policy. The power the House has is to deny funding for a given initiative.

    The media has a duty to perform at least a minimum amount of research to inform its readers and viewers. Because the choose not to I believe they too cannot be trusted to be an arbiter of truth.

    • My opinion is that when someone uses the same term to mean two different things, one that paints their acts as the most honorable while the other portrays their opponents in the worst possible terms, they are dishonest and cannot be trusted.

      Ya think?

      I think we all know this is just political nonsense. It’s just like the case where John Durham is a non-partisan professional who doesn’t let politics interfere in his work — until, that is, the target might be a Democrat, and then he’s a right-wing nut job hack.

      Situational definitions are part and parcel of politics these days, and I share your frustration with the dishonesty of such tactics. Alas, we can look ahead to more of them rather than less.

      The idea that the Executive must acquiesce to Congress or be held to be obstructing Congress is ludicrous.

      More than ludicrous, in my opinion — dangerous. They are attempting to set themselves up as the superior branch of government. Why? Because Democrats control it, of course. If it were the Senate, it would be the same. Or the Presidency, as we saw under Barak Obama.

      This is consistent with “it’s our way or you should go to jail” theory the Democrats have been developing since Obama was elected — the Democrats represent pure good, and any opposition is pure evil.

      This is essentially a religious position. The Democrats are the New Puritans.

      • Imagine if the current process of investigating the unpopular individual until a crime was found was applied to all persons; especially those in minority communities.

        That is the message that should be communicated.

      • As much as I think what the Democrats are doing is dead wrong, let’s not go too far with this line of thinking.

        The House DOES have power to impeach the President of the United States of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. This power needs to be there when there is a President of the United States that has clearly broken the law like Nixon and Clinton did.

        What we are seeing now is a clear abuse of power where the House Democrats are actively trying with all their political might to twist that which is not criminal into being criminal. They’re now trying to twist a legal foreign policy negotiating tool, quid pro quo, into an illegal act, bribery, all because they hate President Trump and they want to get rid of him. It’s clearly a soft coup. For the Washington DC Democrats, the ends justifies the means. This could wipe out nearly all foreign policy that is linked in any way to US foreign aid dollars. If they accomplish this twisted “bribery” tactic they will literally strip away the power of the office of the President of the United States and the office will be finished, it will become nothing more than a figure-head office with no power, no equal status with the other two branches of government. This will end up in the Supreme Court of the United States as a true constitutional crisis issue.

        Okay, discuss…

        • Steve

          The issue is not whether the House has the power to impeach the issue is how that power is used.

          One of the key arguments of the D’s is that Trump abused his power or obstructed justice. Both require an unwillingness to evaluate any legitimate purpose of the act. Comey is fired and this is impeachable because only Comey can investigate Russian collusion. None of Comey’s behaviors that led to his dismissal are relevant.

          The private sector example would be if the local DA chooses not to prosecute a rogue cop for shooting an unarmed suspect and bases that decision only on the prior acts of the victim and ignores all the complaints of excess force by the officer.

          In the Ukraine example the social parallel is a black boy talks to a white woman and a third party deems it to be outrageous behavior of the black boy and proceeds to lynch him despite the fact the white woman says she felt the boy did no wrong.

          Again, the issue is not the power granted by the Constitution it is the improper use of that power for political and personal gain.

          • “The issue is not whether the House has the power to impeach the issue is how that power is used.”

            “the issue is not the power granted by the Constitution it is the improper use of that power for political and personal gain.”

            We are in violent agreement. 😉

        • The House DOES have power to impeach the President of the United States of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

          Yes, but that doesn’t make it a superior branch. The House is also claiming that failure to respond to their demands for information is an impeachable offense. They claim the right to impeach the president for any reason, and they have illustrated that with this entire Ukraine non-scandal.

          So my point is not that the Dems don’t have the power to impeach, but that they have decided that power extends beyond the boundaries of the Constitutional text. Essentially, they are claiming the Constitution means what they say it means with respect to impeachment.

          All this suggests it is the intent of the House to make itself into a super-legislature with the ultimate veto power over the president — that of impeachment and removal. That’s not what the power delegated to them for.

    • “Challenging Congressional demands is not obstruction otherwise a veto could be an impeachable offense.”

      If a Republican is in the Oval Office and the Democrats are in control of Congress that’s exactly what they want. Lies and situational double standards are powerful Democratic Party tools.

      Remember, everything the Democrats do is the will of “the people” where everything the Republicans do is to steal dollars from the poor and fill the pockets of the 1%. Democrats have been setting up the United States with their class warfare bull shit for years. Here’s what’s been at the core of the political left for years…

      If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

      If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

      If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it,
      people will eventually come to believe it.

      If you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes truth.

      If you repeat a lie many times, people are bound to start believing it.

      The Democrats have been tearing down everything about the United States of America with lies since the late 1950’s, they want it gone so they can build up their delusional utopia.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.