Tuesday, May 21, 2019

UPDATED: Impeachment Madness

Reports are out that the Dems may play their "impeachment card" within two weeks. Oh, wait, is it true that Declass could be coming even sooner than that? This morning I wrote:

I assume that the impeachment NOW hysteria gripping Left/Progs in Congress is a function of two--no, make that three--things:
1. The steady drumbeat of damaging revelations--with the promise of MUCH MORE to come;
2. The patent futility of their efforts to slow AG Barr down or faze him;
3. The realization, based on Barr's latest interview that, as I said, Barr has bigger fish to fry than the texting duo of Strzok and Page--and one of those fish is named Barack Obama.

I've just now read Steve Grammatico's thoughtful piece at American Thinker, Impeachment is now the only play the Left has. I agree entirely with the thesis. However, Grammatico makes four points, not all of which I can buy into. Let me deal with each of Grammatico's points in turn:

1. The instant the president is impeached, he will be proclaimed tainted and unworthy of holding the office.  Hillary's charge that he is an illegitimate president will become the new narrative, the inescapable truth.

Yes, of course, that's the goal. But is public acceptance of that new narrative an "inescapable truth"? Only in the world of the old media. Even the presumably preemptive efforts of Big Social Media to control this narrative are far from "inescapable." This is the goal. I predict it will fail.

2. Deathly afraid of Ruth Bader Ginsberg's passing, Schumer will declare that an impeached president has no business making appointments to the Supreme Court.  Thousands of left-leaning lawyers and academics will sign petitions.  The news will be about nothing else.   In this climate, McConnell might be unable to herd all his cats and get a Supreme Court nominee through.

Again, yes, of course. But consider--if Ginsberg's seat should become vacant, is that such a bad thing? Instead of a 5-4 split there would be a 5-3 split for the duration of the vacancy--in favor of conservatives. I like that. Further, that makes the SCOTUS a huge issue for 2020. Is that so bad? On the contrary, all indications are that that was a major plus for Trump in 2016, and the crazed agenda of Left/Progs assures that the SCOTUS as a campaign issue would be a major plus for Trump again.

3. On immigration, trade, Iran, Venezuela, and a host of other matters, squishy Republicans in the House and Senate will determine that Trump is weakened and desert him to bask in the praise of Colbert, Schiff, and the New York Times for abandoning partisanship for the good of the country.  (Barf.)  I'm thinking of you, Senator Romney.

Is this really something new? When was Romney ever going to stop sniping at Trump? The solution lies in McConnell making sure that impeachment is handled ASAP. And it will be, IMO, because McConnell has his own campaign to run as do other GOP senators.

4. Impeachment in the near future obliterates coverage of the DOJ's I.G. report, the Huber inquiry, and anything Bull Durham has come up with since he began his investigation.  Smoking guns?  Brennan, Clapper, Comey indicted?  Who cares?  Section B, page 13, maybe.  Trump's impeachment is the only story.

Here I disagree entirely. The Russia Hoax is an enormously powerful narrative--as we already see in public opinion polling. Impeachment will rightly be seen as an attempted do-over of the Hoax, and that won't be acceptable. On top of that, yes, people WILL care about the upcoming smoking guns. Brennan, Clapper, Comey indicted? People will care because, as I've said, if there's one thing the American people can understand it's the FBI and CIA spying on them and on the POTUS.

Further, try this on for size:

Brennan, Clapper, Comey indicted--and Barack Obama and Joe Biden implicated in the conspiracy, if not indicted themselves.

Make no mistake about it: Barr has bigger fish to fry than the texting duo of Strzok and Page--and one of those fish is named Barack Obama.

The Impeachment Play is a play born of sheer desperation, driven by fear of what the Left/Progs know is coming.

UPDATE 1: As I comment below in response to Unknown's prodding:

While the news reports claim Pelosi is under extreme pressure to go down the impeachment road, I have to suspect that these accounts are driven by media desires--the big show of impeachment and their own Left/Prog preferences--and fail to take into account the fairly significant number of Dems who come from districts that could flip back.

UPDATE 2: Hopefully GOP Solons are paying attention to what's currently going on in the UK, with the collapse of the Tories in favor of the Brexit Party. Not to mention the populist wave that's been sweeping the West. The notion that the GOP can detach itself from Trump risk free? Uh, don't bet on that. From tomorrow's WSJ editorial:

Britain’s Conservative Collapse 
Voters seem ready to crush the Tories for their bungling over Brexit. 
British voters head to the polls Thursday for a European Parliament election they weren’t supposed to vote in, and the biggest loser is likely to be the ruling Conservative Party. Ignoring Brexit for a moment—yes, it’s possible—the most consequential development in Europe the last two years is the collapse of the Tories as a governing party. 
Polls suggest the Conservatives are on track to finish fourth with less than 15% of the vote. The big winner is likely to be the Brexit Party founded by Nigel Farage, which has soared to more than 30% in the polls since it was formed in January. Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party probably will waddle in an anemic second.


  1. The Democrats can impeach, but they have no evidence with which to prove their case. The actual trial will take place in the Senate, and if Mueller couldn't manufacture a crime or evidence despite two years, $34 million, and overwhelming prosecutorial abuse, then the Congress really has no hope of success. And Republican voting to convict (yes, even Romney) was become a national pariah. The outcome of this charade will guarantee that Democrats lose the House in 2020, and I doubt that Pelosi wants that. My guess is that they will settle on a vote of censure because too many Democrats will cross-over and vote against impeachment in a full vote of the House.

    1. Your final point is one that I was thinking I should have mentioned. While the news reports claim Pelosi is under extreme pressure to go down the impeachment road, I have to suspect that these accounts are driven by media desires--the big show of impeachment and their own Left/Prog preferences--and fail to take into account the fairly significant number of Dems who come from districts that could flip back.

  2. I see the 'idea of impeachment' as a media strategy counter-narrative to the drip, drip, drip of the impending IG report, followed by Barr's inquiry, and later report/findings and indictments. The Dems have to give their talking-head co-religionists material to talk about for controlling The Narrative.

    Bluffing is a successful strategy only if your opponent folds in the end. Raising the stakes only works as long as you don't have to show your cards. Trump and Barr have far more nerve, and cards, than do the Pelosi Dems. Impeachment would be overplaying their hand--but talking about it serves a genuine purpose--it keeps hope alive. And for the same reason Mueller kept going on and on like the Energizer bunny--something might be discovered that aids the cause...

    1. Nicely put. Unfortunately for the Dems, but happily for the GOP, the Left/Progs don't seem to understand these realities.

    2. I just read Forbes' comment above. I think much of my comment below somewhat repeats his point about Trump and Barr having the stronger hand, and how Democrats must know their bluff would be called. I didn't mean to copy anyone, I promise! ;^>

    3. I think it's all complementary, different nuances.

  3. Three points:

    1) Let's not forget about Democrats in the Senate, who of course must be communicating with their House counterparts on all of this. A trial would make clear the farcical weakness of the impeachment case, and Democratic Senators from purple or red states would be left in a position of damned if they do (vote to convict), damned if they don't. The Senate doesn't get the final say, of course, but I can't imagine they're not pushing back against pulling the impeachment trigger.

    2) House Dems face a similar problem, which is that, if they are to impeach, they must draw up specific charges and arguments for those charges, and at that point things break down. The fact that the impeach nutters will eventually have to go from the general to the specific is their real Achilles' heel here -- or so it seems to me.

    3) Perhaps most important of all, most people simply don't feel it in their bones that Trump has committed impeachable acts. They also know they can pass judgment on his presidency the right way, the American way, in November of 2020. Impeachment, I think, just won't feel right to most voters, and if the economy keeps chugging along, and if Barr's DOJ does its job (two very real possibilities), Democrats will be poised to lose not just the presidency and the House, but any real claim to the political Moral High Ground for some time to come. There must be cooler heads that are well aware of all this, and I'll be surprised if they don't ultimately prevail.

    1. All great points, Brad. Re #1 it has to be significant that we haven't been hearing anything about impeachment from that direction. The problem the Dems are facing, however, is their base.

    2. Re their base, I couldn't agree more and should've thrown that in there. My points were assuming the very shaky proposition that the determined will to long-term power of Democratic Party bigwigs will enforce a sort of sanity that will ultimately prevent formal impeachment. The lunatic base could easily overpower any such sanity. Caveat duly noted.