Why Ethics Alarms Won’t Cover The Impeachment Trial

I’m not going to waste time watching the impeachment trial, nor will I waste time reading what the media says about it. The ethics issue was settled before the House vote impeaching Trump was even completed. That issue is simple: the effort by the Democrats to abuse the impeachment clause in the Constitution as a partisan tactic designed to obstruct and harass the President and harm his chances for re-election is one of the most dishonest, dastardly, undemocratic political schemed in U.S. history. It is terribly damaging to the stability of the republic and creates a disastrous precedent that threatens all future Presidents.

For this reason, the impeachment effort must fail. It would be important for it to fail even if the Democratic Party’s articles of impeachment stated genuine impeachable  offenses, which they do not. Only failure, followed by an overwhelming  public rejection of the party responsible for in the coming election might begin to heal the gaping wounds the past three years have opened.

Since the House process was a sham, the Republican majority’s determination to give the impeachment articles the bum’s rush and end the trial as quickly as possible is fair, legally justified and politically wise. The Democrats want to use the process as a free anti-Trump infomercial, much as they exploited the Mueller Report for the same purpose. Some measure of that is unavoidable, but it must not be permitted to go on one second longer than absolutely necessary (though some Republican rebuttals may have their own strategic value).

It is apparent that the news media commentary on the “trial” (it really isn’t a trial) will continue to strive for spin value rather tahn accuracy, seeking to influence members of the public who either didn’t watch or don’t understand the proceedings. I read accounts of the President’s lawyers performance yesterday that said they eviscerated the Democratic impeachment claims, and other account that said they embarrassed themselves. I could find out the truth by watching myself, but to what end? It literally doesn’t matter. After the vote acquitting the President occurs, Democrats will say it’s a dark day for Democracy, and that the GOP has rejected the rule of law, and then craft it all into fundraising appeals and election talking points. Then, as we have been warned by Representatives Al Green and Maxine Waters, the Democrats will look for another excuse to impeach Trump again.

There is no there there, as Gertrude Stein memorably said of Oakland.  The Democrats are not serious, and are simply using the impeachment follies as bread and circuses for their angriest, most coup-minded base.

I was informed via email that Rep. Schiff even had the gall (and stupidity) today to echo one of the Democrats’ hyper-partisan “resistance” law professor witnesses (I don’t recall, which, and it’s not important enough to check) and say, “If this isnt impeachablethen nothing is impeachable.” 

Now, if Schiff had an ion of respect for the public, and any fear at all that he could say anything that might cause impeachment supporters to say, “Wait a minute, that’s ridiculous. If a President isn’t impeached for using his unquestioned Constitutional power to pressure a foreign government to investigate a high U.S. official for corrupt financial influence peddling benefiting his ne’er do well son, that means treason isn’t impeachable? Murder? Taking bribes? Conspiring to take over the government? That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard! Who ARE these people?”, then he would never dare say something so idiotic.

Absent some major, unforseen development, I am going to stick with long-standing blanket diagnosis that this is the culmination of the epic unethical  tantrum thrown by Democrats, the resistance and the mainstream media upon losing the 2016 election. Trump’s impeachable “high crimes” are that he a) won and b) is Donald Trump, and I am truly sick of writing about it.

There are better uses for an ethics blog than rehashing the obvious, even if so many people have been rendered incapable of seeing the obvious.


24 thoughts on “Why Ethics Alarms Won’t Cover The Impeachment Trial

  1. Amen and amen! We’ve tried to watch a few minutes of the circus, and we simply cannot. Let the clowns have their little bit of fun in the sun, the terminate the mess with extreme prejudice!

  2. The blatantly partisan micromanaging precedence that the Democrats are setting with their impeachment and the way they are handling the trial in the Senate should make every American, especially any future Republican presidential hopeful, cringe. No President will be immune from this kind of partisan micromanaging from this point on and if the Democrats succeed in convicting President Trump and removing him from office the coequal power of the President will be forever diminished.

  3. This goes all the way back to Bork. The updated version was Kavanaugh and even my pea-sized brain could grasp what would happen when the House turned blue. I have just watched snippets of the House action and did catch Schiff the other day. Geez…another contribution to the Trump’s coffers…that’s how bad it is. Got me to open my wallet.

  4. Good. Full stop.

    There is no more boring subject than the constant repetition of partisan talking points by both sides. That is the limit of the value of this exercise, if that represents any sort of meaningful “value.” In my view, it doesn’t.

  5. This is ten times worse than Watergate to watch. All I can say is we could turn this whole matter over to Dr. Phil and he would have it all wrapped up within an hour. Sadly, the American people would probably be more trusting and satisfied with his judgment anyway. The only thing that keeps me going is the anticipation of the phrase “We now return to your regularly scheduled programming.”

    • “The only thing that keeps me going is the anticipation of the phrase ‘We now return to your regularly scheduled programming.’ ”

      Will you settle for Pitchers-n-Catchers Report In Three Weeks…?

      • I can’t believe it’s been 3 years since you wrote the post on the clock. One reason I commented is because that reference was still in my memory and I thought it was more recent, man, time flies. Anyway, it’s 100 seconds to midnight; so, we’re in trouble because daylight savings time is coming. That means, when we leap ahead 1 hour in March, we’ll be 3500 seconds past midnight. It’s so, ummmm… arbitrary.

  6. “Instead, we are here today to consider a much more grave matter and that is an attempt to use the powers of the presidency to cheat in an election. For precisely this reason, the president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.” -Schiff

    A tiny cabal of elitist busy bodies deciding the electorate can’t figure things out is pretty much how every wretched dictatorship and bloody revolution has played out time immemorial. And the Democrats are screaming that it’s the Republicans who want to undo our Republic…

    Good lord.

    • “For precisely this reason, the president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.”

      Yesterday I also heard Schiff state something like this in his opening statements, “Republicans are telling you that this impeachment is all about undoing the 2016 election, no it’s not about undoing an election where the majority of the people voted against the President…”, that’s not an exact quote but it was something like that.

      There are many statements that lead me to believe that the DC Democrats are playing the long game and figuratively building their hill to die on.

      Over on Quora I asked the question, “Do you think Washington DC Democrats are “figuratively” building their hill to die on with their purely partisan impeachment of President Trump?”


      Here is one of the answers…

      The Democrats have placed the GOP in a lose-lose situation. The majority of Americans feel that the impeachment was valid and that Trump should be removed from office. Because of this, no matter what the Senate Republicans do, their party will suffer, at least in the near term.

      If they convict, they become the first party to have a president removed from office. They will also split their own voters, as the deranged Trumpeteers will be howling for the blood of every Republican Senator who votes for conviction.

      If they acquit, then the GOP Senators who bucked the majority of Americans by supporting that acquittal will find themselves facing more serious challenges for their own Senate seats, increasing the odds that the GOP will lose control over the Senate in 2020 or 2022. It will also firmly put the Republican party itself into opposition with that majority of Americans who believe Trump is guilty, many of whom are independents and (soon to be former) Republicans.

      Now in the long term there is a possibility for a Republican upside. If they accept the near term damage that conviction will inflict upon them, but they make a strong case of only convicting because of their supposed commitment to being the law and order party, they may, in the long term, marginalize the radical wing of their own party and win back many of the disaffected moderates who have been falling away from them in recent years.

      The Democrats are playing a longer game here, and their primary focus is not on the White House. They are after control of the Senate, first and foremost.

      (Bold Mine)

      As the author of that comment correctly stated, I too believe that the Democrats are playing a longer game, but I think the game is to bring down the system and it’s being set up to do that if they don’t win in November 2020. I’ve been saying for quite a while now that the Democrats only do things that they think will help them achieve their “Utopian” socialist goals and, keeping that in mind, the only way they are going to achieve their goal is to bring down the Constitution. They have to keep the Republicans focused on the moment so they won’t notice where the Democrats are leading them. They are building up their anti-Constitutional crisis with absolutes like “either you’re for the Constitution of you’re for a traitor President” or “to be loyal to the President or the Constitution”. The DC Democrats are trying to use the Constitution and the governing rules of Congress to prove that the Constitution and our form of government is corrupt and obsolete; they have become anti-Constitution and anti-American and if they ever get a super majority in Congress and have the White House look out Constitution and hello totalitarianism. The system itself allows them to abuse the system so they can use that system to destroy itself; the ends justify the means.

  7. Entirely up to you whether you contribute or not. More than enough has emerged to inform voters. “By their fruits ye shall know them”. Let’s see whether the voters care about ‘character’ any more. Not long to wait.

    • Except that impeachment has absolutely nothing to do with character, Andrew…at least, a proper, legal impeachment process as designed in our Constitution. But if you perceive that this abortion of one is about character, then you understand what’s unethical about it

      • And I mean this as a compliment, and it is a relief. You are an outsider, and immune to a lot of the bias being promoted. To an outsider, it looks like President Trump is being impeached because of what he IS, rather than based on anything he did that he can’t do and other Presidents are permitted to do routinely. Good. Because that’s exactly what is going on, though the Democrats/resistance media deny it

      • My point is simply that the voters will decide. I can’t see anything in the current process that resembles a legitimate ‘trial’, and the result is a foregone conclusion. A President’s immediate survival seems to depend simply on him maintaining political support in the Senate (or rather to avoid facing super majority opposition). But interested voters now know more about how the president operates (ie his ‘character’) and we will soon see the extent to which they care. They still wield the ultimate power.

        I suppose it should not be surprising to find the Constitution to be still a work in progress. It is only 230 years old. It would in many ways be useful if a President did shoot someone in Time Square. At least that might then generate some useful precedent as to how the law may be applied to constrain Presidential behaviour.

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.