In asking serious questions, one has to be prepared for the inevitable: people answering those questions armed with their own opinions like stilettos. If one is really interested in what people think, it could be a rewarding even educational exercise.
Recently, Charlie Daniels had a column laying out particular grievances on impeachment fever running wild, then asked a series of questions. That is always a good format. Asking questions can be a tool on a blog. It’s nice to care what others think.
However, what it really does is open the door for naysayers and critics to offer pungent rebukes from their lofty perches. That is what happened with Charlie’s Soap Box piece. Maybe no more critics than usual though a bit more descriptive than usual. One suggested he was now a former fan.
I’m sure Charlie was ready for that reaction when he posed the questions. The questions were important and consequential. But it showed there are enough people out there who will fully embrace any criticism of Trump, and who see — in their minds anyway — lots of reasons to impeach our 45th president.
But here we are with impeachers having their way. They were eager for this moment from the beginning. It could not come fast enough for them and now it is finally here.
Trump haters will jump at any chance to express their discontent with him. Even Christmas decorations have become a symbol of their disdain for the Trump family. And they don’t despise just him but the entire family. At one impeachment hearing, a Stanford professor made a rotten joke using Trump’s son Baron’s name. She later apologized only while demanding an apology from Trump.
Congress subpoenaed all Trump family financial documents from Deutsche Bank prompting Ginsburg to slap a stay on it until SCOTUS can hold a vote. Nothing seems off limits to these critics. Hopefully SCOTUS will provide clarity on the matter and for future presidents. Should Congress have unbridled power to impound any personal documents from a sitting president it wants? That can hardly be a good thing or precedent for the future. What about Barry Soetoro having all his personal records sealed? But that was not a problem for the Democrats. Plus, Trump documents have a habit of leaking.
That deep document dive brings the issue into focus. What do Democrats care about future precedents they are setting, both on impeachment and records? They don’t. So this is what I call the politics of here and now — the only thing they care about. As if the future will take care of itself regardless what they do today, with little or no effect on the future. But that is not the case. They don’t care. Nor do they really care what effect it has.
The politics of “here an now” determine now is everything, the future is of no concern. Whatever happens as a result is of no consequence and certainly will not matter later to them. Now is where they live, in hatred, but it is also the incubator for the future. Democrats and incubators don’t get along so well. If they can believe in aborting a baby in the 9th month, then they will do just about anything out of convenience for the moment.
Instead, they will try to shift blame and the argument back on Trump. But it is not him setting the future precedent here. Democrats are oblivious to our posterity and future. Rather than impeachment being caused by a scandal, impeachment has become the scandal. And now investigating corruption becomes an impeachable offense.
Subsequently, any defense of President Trump is then seen as incompetence, even legal malpractice, such as with Professor Jonathan Turley delivering a defense against impeaching Trump. He was the outlier to the tar and feather scholars.
Think about the other three witnesses. All tenured professors from Ivory Towered institutions calling on impeaching and removing a president at the drop of a hat.
“Slipshod impeachment” is the tonic, but what is the illness?
Right Ring | Bullright