Sunday, March 26, 2017

Going After Trump


For John, BLUFThis is terrible.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




This is from The Wash Post and Jennifer Palmieri, Communications Director for Ms Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.  The dateline is 24 March 2017. Here is how Ms Palmieri wraps it up:
The possibility of collusion between Trump’s allies and Russian intelligence is much more serious than Watergate. It is a constitutional crisis. It represents a violation of our republic’s most sacred trust.

The worst part about our lackluster collective response to Russia’s interference is that it represents exactly what the Russians were hoping to produce: apathy. Their goal, in addition to installing a president sympathetic to their views, was to undermine Americans’ belief in our democracy. For Americans to think that none of this really matters, that it’s all a game. That’s how they truly erode U.S. moral authority and strength over the long term. It’s what they have sought to do to European adversaries for many years, and now they have brought this seed of destruction here.

We all have a role to play in stopping it. Each of us should be judged by how we respond at this moment when the most fundamental precept of our democracy has been violated.

"…much more serious than Watergate."

That is a serious charge.  And, in the OpEd Ms Palmieri states that Congress should not be acting on President Trump's program until this is all cleared up.  Will it ever be all cleared up or will it be like the shooter on the grassy knoll?

Certain (all?) Democrats want to stop the Government until they can jettison the results of the last election.  Here is a question.  If the election of President Trump was illegitimate, why weren't the elections of Republican Senators and Representatives also illegitimate?  They were carried along on the same wave of change as President Trump.

If all is illegitimate, then we need a new election, for which we have no precedent.  What would Ms Palmieri propose?  What would Ms Nancy Pelosi propose?

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer?  Senator E Warren?  Ms Clinton?

Most likely there is no feasible plan.  So, we fall back on impeachment.  But, one would think that precedent would have the Democrats crying to replace Vice President Mike Pence before they went for the impeachment of President Trump?  After all, why would Democrats wish to replace a GOP oriented Progressive with a true Conservative.

If Pence went, who would President Trump nominate to replace him and who would Congress approve?

That probably leaves us Speaker Paul Ryan fleeting up to be the President.

Has anyone gamed this out?

And see my previous post.

Regards  —  Cliff

No comments: