Impeachment 2.0: Even Sillier this Time Around - Politicrossing
Connect with us
impeachment impeachment

Politics

Impeachment 2.0: Even Sillier this Time Around

Published

on

Ready for impeachment 2.0? First, a constitutional refresher:

“The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” ~Article 2, Section 4, U.S. Constitution

The former president is now a private citizen. We have a new president.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Red Herring Argument: The KKK Agrees With You

Yet this week we’ll have a new Senate impeachment trial. For those who care, the party in power will try to prove that a former president committed high crimes and misdemeanors and must be removed from office—even though he’s not in office and can’t be removed from an office he’s not in.

This exercise in ridiculous redundancy is like if you threw away an old shirt and replaced it with a new shirt and then dug the old shirt out of the trash and held a trial to prove that you should throw it away again.

Senate impeachment 2.0 is so spectacularly unconstitutional that the head of one branch of government, Chief Justice John Roberts, refuses to assume his constitutionally mandated role as presiding judge.

Mob rules

Does this deter the defenders of our democracy? No chief justice, no matter. The venerable eight-term Democrat Senator Pat Leahy from Vermont will serve quite nicely. So instead of an impartial chief justice, we’ll have a senator who’s already called for conviction. Leahy will be as impartial as a torch-toting member of a torch-toting mob can be.

It’s like a posse who captures an alleged criminal and tries him by campfire because the town judge refuses to participate. “Who’s gonna be the judge of this here trial?” Head scratching ensues before Red nominates Slim and perches him atop his horse as judge and member of the jury.

Double dumb. Just like impeachment trial 2.0. Well, maybe dumb’s not the right word. Senate Democrats aren’t stupid, but they will certainly look foolish trying to remove a removed president. Our Constitution’s impeachment provision isn’t meant to be a partisan cudgel against former presidents or to prevent them from ever running again.

In fairness, many of those pushing this impeachment are true believers in the Trump-as-threat-to-our-democracy mantra, but others likely see this as an opportunity to kill Trumpism once and for all. For those opportunists, the word is Machiavellian.

Let’s see this for what it is—an historic first—a Senate kangaroo court trial. We’re about to witness a pack of partisan politicians try to convince us that a former foolish president is A) guilty of egregiously galactic levels of fomenting insurrection and treason, and B) a continued “threat to our democracy.”

In short, they will attempt to remove a former president from an office he no longer holds. When that fails, they’ll try to prevent him from ever threatening our democracy again by barring him from public office.

This is justified, they say. After all, he’s the eternal boogeyman, you see. At least, that’s how the party in power wants you to think of him.

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.


Patrick grew up in Texas and graduated from the University of North Texas with a master’s degree in journalism and advertising. His undergraduate degree is in English and photography. He served six years in the U.S. Navy where his life was changed forever by the Lord Jesus Christ. He lives in the Sierra Nevada of Northern California with his wife, dog and two cats. He enjoys hiking and cycling, taking pictures, writing and blogging at https://luscri.com/



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Politics

Rachel & Ralph’s Reality Check: The KKK, capitalism and unions divided over vaccines

Published

on

Townhall contributor Rachel Alexander and Newsmax contributor Ralph Benko discuss the red herring argument of criticizing someone because the KKK agrees with them, The Washington Post finally acknowledges the superiority of capitalism, and how the unions are divided over mandating the COVID-19 vaccine.

 

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Red Herring Argument: The KKK Agrees With You

Continue Reading

Covid

Give Me Liberty or Give Me The Vaccine

Published

on

Patrick Henry Speaking About Freedom

The American history books use to teach of a patriot named Patrick Henry.  Patrick Henry was a founding father of American.  Yes the term founding father is a term that Google still finds worthy as they identifies Henry as one.  Patrick Henry was a man who stood up to the oppression of King George.  In the second Virginia Convention in 1775, he proclaimed “give me liberty or give me death.”  In days past, Patrick Henry was a symbol of the American spirit of freedom.  His passion and his ability to communicate his desire for freedom are powerful words that continue to motivate bold and courageous leaders for the last 200 years.

Today it would be wise for patriot Americans who value freedom to again pick up this sentiment.  The call that freedom is the most essential component of existence which brings life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Vaccine Manipulation:

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Red Herring Argument: The KKK Agrees With You

President Joe Biden now declares that Americans who do not take the Covid19 vaccine are “not as smart as he thought they were” and that they (American citizens) are “a real problem.”

Many Americans believe in the vaccine, but they believe more in freedom.  Donald Trump, the leader of the Republic Party has also encouraged people to get the vaccine.  The vaccine is not a Republican or Democrat issue, but how the vaccine is administered very much speaks to how the political leaders look at freedom.

Free Americans should believe that the Government should not be able to dictate the health decisions that an individual should make.  They believe that they should have the ability to review facts and data and not be forced to make a decision about their health based on strawman arguments like you “if you care for your pet, you should get vaccinated.”

Maybe instead of shaming people or trying to bribe people into getting the vaccine, lawmakers should convince people on the merit of the issue and allow them to exercise their freedom to make the best choice for themselves and their country, after all that is what freedom is about.  Maybe President Biden could try to solve the real problem in the vaccine issue.  He could do that by answering the questions that many Americans are still looking for as they analyze their decision about their own health.  Answering any or all of the following questions would be a start:

Vaccine Questions About Covid19:

  1.  What are the top 3 risks that a person might experience with the Covid19 vaccine?  Instead of answering this simple question, those that are in charge get offended when people seek good answers to health.  It has been the history in America to outline the potential health hazards to the choices that people make such as a warning on a pack of cigarettes.  But this concept seems foreign to those that would like to manipulate the public to make a decision without a choice – that just seems wrong.
  2. Why does everyone need the vaccine, including those that already have had Covid19?  This is an honest question and one that Senator Rand Paul has asked.  There may be a case to be made for those who have had Covid19 to receive the vaccine, but it seems like no logical or rational person is making one.
  3. Is there anyone who should not get the Covid19 vaccines?  Health issues are very personal issues and often are different for people with different issues and demographics.  There has been very little talk in main stream media about exceptions to the vaccine and more and more talk about how even babies should be getting the vaccine.  John Hopkins recently misled their readers with statement on their website about children getting the vaccine – “Yes. Experts, including those at Johns Hopkins, believe that the benefits of being vaccinated for COVID-19 outweigh the risks. Although COVID-19 in children is usually milder than in adults, some kids can get very sick and have complications or long-lasting symptoms that affect their health and well-being. The virus can cause death in children although this is rarer than for adults.”  Further the CDC is now recommending the pregngnant women and new mothers who are breastfeeding should receive the vaccine.  They state on the website “Pregnant and recently pregnant people are more likely to get severely ill with COVID-19 compared with non-pregnant people. If you are pregnant, you can receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Getting a COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy can protect you from severe illness from COVID-19.”  These kind of one sided statements, should be carefully read to consider the political biases of the organization.  One has to wonder if they are really concerned about the health of the individual or the health of the whole.  I would be very hesitate to recommend a trial vaccine to a pregnant woman when there has not been studies to show that no impact will be made on the mother of the child.
  4. Where did Covid19 orginate?  An essential question in the vaccine conversation, should be consideration as to where Covid orginated.  If Covid19 orginated in a lab as a way to kill off a part of the communist elderly in China, then that would dedicate who needs the vaccine.  The idea a communist country was developing a method to kill off part of their population for population control should be considered and explored.  Americans politicians on the left seem to forget that just a few years ago communist China limited the number of babies that their people could have and would kill a child if it was born and was above the number that the government dictated as acceptable.  It is fair for the American population to wait to understand where Covid19 began before making health choices about their own health.

These questions and many more still deserve an answer.  It is the responsibility of the leaders and press in a free country to answer the fair and honest questions of free people.  Until those questions, millions of Americans will still cry out “give me liberty, or give me the vaccine.”  These Americans still choose freedom first.

Continue Reading

 

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Sites We Like

Our Newsletter

Become a PolitiCrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Trending

Politicrossing
 
Send this to a friend