So you want the highest office in the land to go unchecked? Impeachment is also a future deterrent for future presidents. It's far more important that the current moment. Presidents need to realize there are consequences for abusing their power. Senators need to realize there are consequences for being a lap dog for a president who constantly abuses their power. If politicians are afraid to hold the president accountable because of fears of future elections or fears that his lackeys might not budge, then we essentially have an autocratic regime and future candidates would understand this and be more willing to abuse their power.
A desire to pass progressive legislation currently with a GOP senate with Mitch at the helm is as unpragmatic as having platitudic discussions about solving world poverty.
This impeachment “story” seems to be turning against the Democrats very quickly. Now we learn that Adam Schiff may have helped the whistleblower write the complaint! ...and Biden doesn’t want to talk about Ukraine! This may sink his candidacy...
Trump appears to lack Biden's discipline. His 12 year old mind, though very, very large, is letting him down.
I've said this before - I see lots of stuff comparing Trump to a child and it has always bothered me. Most children I know, especially those that are very young, possess a much higher level of self-awareness, cognitive ability, and moral/ethical grounding. People don't start out wanting to put other human beings in cages to dehumanize them. That is learned behavior.
Normally plea bargain involve actual punishment and restriction due to the crimes. You are free to go if you give us $10000, from a public fund that doesn’t belong to you, isn’t a plea bargain.
Late to the party, but it took me all of one click to find this out about your NYT author: Christopher Buskirk is editor and publisher of the journal American Greatness, a co-author of “American Greatness: How Conservatism, Inc. Missed the 2016 Election and What the D.C. Establishment Needs to Learn,” and a contributing opinion writer. What is American Greatness, you ask? https://amgreatness.com/who-we-are/
Actually attacking the source is quite valid when you post opinion pieces rather than news. Attacking the source when posting news is lazy as in if the news is inaccurate, one should be able to explicitly show what part is inaccurate. If the source is posting their opinion, then yes, their previous leanings and biases are very relevant.
It didn't take me long to read some of his other writings. He's the verbal equivalent of one of Mojo's cartoons, but with bigger words. I'm not attacking him, I'm dismissing him as a person who brings anything serious to the table.
I read some of it. He mentions inflaming the Republican base... with RBG's seat on the line, I'm pretty sure they'll stop playing dead and roll over to play fetch at the very first Dog Whistle blown. It actually pays more for big tent Dems to give a ****, but the ultimate question is how the hearings affect moderates, something the writer doesn't go into detail.
In our modern politics, especially as stoked by the keep-em-angry media of all stripes, political team becomes part of a person's identity, more than it used to. I mean to watch really bad news for the POTUS, it becomes super personal bad news for some people, like a cancer diagnosis or a beloved pet dying or losing a job. But it is really sad.
If you don't mind a separate but I think closely related question: What do you think of this Whitehouse and their surrogates repeatedly (and almost exclusively) attacking the source, in any case of criticism? I've never seen anything like it from a presidential administration. I guess it's just an "old habits die hard" sort of thing, but it's not a good look, in my opinion.
