berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 15,257
- 12,694
- 2,320
In anticipation of the reflexive "Vox, ha ha" response from Trumpists I'll say what I always say, disparaging the source of information loses all credibility if you can't factually refute what they report.
..................................................................................................................................
Republicans’ vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure.
The Constitution was not built for this
"President Donald Trump deserved to be impeached over his conduct in the Ukraine affair. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did the right thing by pushing for an impeachment vote, and Democrats (all but a handful of them) did the right thing by voting to impeach.
But not a single Republican did. And the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.
The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.
“Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 65. “What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS?”
The highly partisan House vote, and the universal assessment in Washington that the Senate will vote to acquit Trump on party lines, reveals that Hamilton’s assumptions about our institutions no longer hold true. Under conditions of extreme polarization, where at least one party cares more about defeating its political opponents than safeguarding against abuses of power, the impeachment power is neutered unless the president’s opposition has the House and a two-thirds majority in the Senate (an extremely unlikely set of circumstances)."
.............................................................................................................................
Clearly the founders did not consider the possibility of Faux........an infotainment network dedicated to disinformation. Nor did they consider the possibility an entire congressional caucus would abdicate their responsibility to their oath of office, to the Constitution, and to their country by ignoring the overwhelming evidence of a prez's impeachable wrongdoing in order to protect their seat in government. IOW, they never contemplated the cowardice and duplicity of the POT.........party of Trump.
..................................................................................................................................
Republicans’ vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure.
The Constitution was not built for this
"President Donald Trump deserved to be impeached over his conduct in the Ukraine affair. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did the right thing by pushing for an impeachment vote, and Democrats (all but a handful of them) did the right thing by voting to impeach.
But not a single Republican did. And the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.
The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.
“Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 65. “What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS?”
The highly partisan House vote, and the universal assessment in Washington that the Senate will vote to acquit Trump on party lines, reveals that Hamilton’s assumptions about our institutions no longer hold true. Under conditions of extreme polarization, where at least one party cares more about defeating its political opponents than safeguarding against abuses of power, the impeachment power is neutered unless the president’s opposition has the House and a two-thirds majority in the Senate (an extremely unlikely set of circumstances)."
.............................................................................................................................
Clearly the founders did not consider the possibility of Faux........an infotainment network dedicated to disinformation. Nor did they consider the possibility an entire congressional caucus would abdicate their responsibility to their oath of office, to the Constitution, and to their country by ignoring the overwhelming evidence of a prez's impeachable wrongdoing in order to protect their seat in government. IOW, they never contemplated the cowardice and duplicity of the POT.........party of Trump.
