I think, that the crux of the matter, for me..is that I don't see the Congress as being an arbiter of law, in this case. I know it sounds odd..that the body that makes our laws is not competent to administer them. I think the Founding Father's screwed up..with the impeachment process. Allegations of wrong doing should have gone straight to the Supreme Court. Anyway, it is all moot. We have the system that we have.
You make a lot of statements..that are opinion..as though they are fact. Some I agree with..some..for me..the jury is still out. Pelosi sitting splendid in the eyes of every reasonable person on earth..is one that I have issue with. Keeping the politics of impeachment in reasonable confines is another. The House could have been fairer..they could have opened it up to Republicans..but here is the thing--their minds were already made up..and Impeachment was inevitable. Any investigation where the outcome is preordained is as tainted as a trial where acquittal is certain. Understand that I think Trump is guilty as can be--but the process IS tainted. True justice can only exist when there is impartial judgement...and that does not exist..in this impeachment process...at all.
BTW, I was against Clinton's impeachment as well. Despite the undisputed fact that he did break the law. I note that he did not get removed..as the Senate..in a purely partisan vote..refused to confirm.
Yes, Trump's stock in trade is divisiveness. He rode division straight into the White House--but impeachment has not changed that..it has exacerbated it. Without even holding out the hope that Trump will be kicked out. Many of us have notice this..and commented on it..it is not new.
In the end...I'm against things I see as meaningless...as far as results are concerned. I get that it's red meat to the Left..that it energizes the base..but Kabuki I said..and I stand by it.
I respect that you see me as on the wrong track...I feel the same way about impeachment..as it stands. That is, of course, subject to change.
But, the Senate IS the arbiter of the Constitution, as the Founders thought it out, and thought it through well. I understand what your hope is, involving the Supreme Court, but what you'd get instead is a Supreme Court dragged into the political muck. "Activist judges" should have been ringing in your ears while you typed that. It would be a massive - massive - disservice to the country. Goes without saying, by decrying Impeachment and Trial while there is no way criminally to indict the president, you are aiming, unwittingly I trust, for a presidency above the law, the exact opposite of what the Founders wanted - what they feared most of all, actually. Impeachment and Trial of the president is political, inevitably so. All the more important is that those in a position to sit as judges over the president be taken to account, and compelled to justify their decisions before the ultimate arbiter, the population. That's exactly as it should be, and based on a solid foundation of fact. The House provided
such basis, and the Senators have a chance to improve on that, or besmirch and deface themselves.
The Republicans had every chance to involve themselves in the Impeachment inquiry, question witnesses, and call witnesses with pertinent knowledge of the matters at hand. What they did instead is create a spectacle, and then they turned around to whine about how unfair it all was, when it was not. I find it shameful to fall for that. Had Republicans in the House any - ANY - interest in uncovering the truth, they would have supported the calls for Mulvaney and Bolton to testify. They did, however, not. Not once, not one of them. And then you turn around and complain it's political, and blame it on Democrats. That is a severe error of judgment. Yes, Republicans did call fact witnesses who actually testified defying Trump's orders not to, and, boy, did that explode into their faces, as these pretty much confirmed the wrongdoing.
Not impeaching the president, when half the country supports impeachment and removal, would be at least as divisive as impeachment is. The root cause of the divisiveness is Trump's habitual corruption. It is as if I never said it, or didn't say it with good reason, and you simply restate that impeachment is divisive, as if that amounted to a valid argument. Do we now make holding the Executive to account contingent on possible divisions? For that is what your stance boils down to, I am sad to say, and that would be another massive disservice to the country.
Yeah, I see, you are concerned about divisions, and fear for the country. Creating a presidency above the law, however, is no way to preserve the Republic - it much rather amounts to doing Cesar's bidding.
