Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, December 05, 2019

The impeachment investigation of President Trump is now moving to the Judiciary Committee. Soon, if the House votes to impeach Trump, the ball will be in the Senate's court, where a conviction seems unlikely. America should thus consider Rep. Jerrold Nadler's warning about going forward: Impeachment, he's on record as saying, requires "a broad consensus of the American public, a broad agreement of almost everybody, that this fellow has got to go because he's a clear and present danger to our liberty and to our Constitution."

A bigger problem for Nadler, though, is that he said this in 1998, when he was denouncing the Republicans' impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Now, Nadler says "impeachment is imperative." In reversing his position, Nadler has plenty of company on both sides of the aisle.

But politicians from both parties are using impeachment as a political weapon more often today than ever before, which runs the risk of making it the new "normal."

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Quite clearly, then, impeachment has once again been politicized"one might almost say weaponized"during the past two or three decades. But the more troubling question is whether Democrats and Republicans in this hyperpartisan age are simply more willing than their predecessors to use impeachment as a political weapon, or whether they are, in fact, living in two different worlds that make their narratives so different that they genuinely can't understand each other, at least regarding what constitutes a threat to the American system of government.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

For those of you with an attention span greater than a squirrel, this is well worth the read.

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-05 03:08 PM | Reply

--For those of you with an attention span greater than a squirrel

Well that rules out most of the DR Left.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-05 03:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"they are, in fact, living in two different worlds"

Yes, they are. And the GOP world normalizes cheating, lying, incompetence, and disloyalty to one's nation.

#3 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-05 03:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"they genuinely can't understand each other, at least regarding what constitutes a threat to the American system of government"

Donald Trump behaves, and argues legally, that he is above the law.

That's a threat. People who don't understand that don't want to understand.

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-05 03:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

On one point, though, there's a consensus. In both the Clinton and Trump episodes, the opposition party has viewed the president, on a personal level, as a morally contemptible human being who doesn't deserve to hold office. That in itself is probably not an impeachable offense. The big question is how far such views will drive our politicians to find something"anything"they think they can use to justify impeachment and removal in the future, and what collateral damage this will inflict on our constitutional system.

His point seems to stand only if you think the Clinton impeachment in 98 and the Trump impeachment are for equally bad behavior.

Buckner F. Melton Jr. = JeffJ's pen name??

#5 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2019-12-05 04:01 PM | Reply

"In both the Clinton and Trump episodes, the opposition party has viewed the president, on a personal level, as a morally contemptible human being who doesn't deserve to hold office."

I think both are morally contemptible.
But both earned the right to the office.
What they did afterwards, and whether it's enough to lose them that right, is not comparable.

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-05 04:31 PM | Reply

Well that rules out most of the DR Left.

#2 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Sure thing waterhead.

#7 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-05 04:51 PM | Reply

Buckner F. Melton Jr. = JeffJ's pen name??

#5 | POSTED BY SCHIFFERBRAINS

Nope. It's Dirk Diggler.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-05 05:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Nope. It's Dirk Diggler.

#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-05 05:10 PM

Now you're talkin....

-Laura Mohr

#9 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-05 05:37 PM | Reply

using the office for personal gain
obstruction
hell, I'd through the emoluments clause in there for good measure

you really don't need to politicize this one.

In this case, just go with the facts.

#10 | Posted by fresno500 at 2019-12-05 05:44 PM | Reply

"using the office for personal gain"

"Judge Says Trump Must Pay $2 Million Over Misuse Of Foundation Funds"
www.npr.org

^
Not Impeachable, according to Fresno500.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-05 05:45 PM | Reply

"obstruction"

Mueller himself had acknowledged all the ways that Trump's behavior met all three prongs of the test for obstruction of justice. Under questioning from Lieu, Mueller also seemed to imply that he would have indicted Trump if not for Justice Department rules.
"I'd like to ask you the reason, again, that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.
"That is correct,"
www.theatlantic.com

Big surprise:
Obstruction by Trump is rated "Not Impeachable" by the person who just said obstruction is impeachable.

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-05 05:48 PM | Reply

So? Cops use laws as weapons all the time.

#13 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2019-12-06 07:35 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Nadler's warning about going forward: Impeachment, he's on record as saying, requires "a broad consensus of the American public, a broad agreement of almost everybody, that this fellow has got to go because he's a clear and present danger to our liberty and to our Constitution."

He was wrong when he said that. It is the duty of every member of Congress to act when they have knowledge of wrongdoing by the President which affects national security. It is not the time then to require "a broad consensus of the American public, a broad agreement of almost everybody." No, it is the time to hold hearings and present the evidence and thereby convince the public, at least those willing to have an open mind and consider the evidence because, as we all know, there is a large segment who will not put America first regardless of what evidence you put before them. We may very well be wasting our time because the Republicans in the Senate will never put America first, we know that but we still have a patriotic duty to try.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-06 09:44 AM | Reply

"It is the duty of every member of Congress to act when they have knowledge of wrongdoing by the President which affects national security."

Like when Pelosi learned we were torturing terrorism suspects?

#15 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-12-06 09:45 AM | Reply

"Like when Pelosi learned we were torturing terrorism suspects?"

I can only state what their duty is, It is not my job to be responsible on how they handle those responsibilities.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-06 10:38 AM | Reply

I particularly like Adam Schiffs abuse of power obtaining political rivals phone records.

Outstanding!

#17 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-06 10:55 AM | Reply

Nope. It's Dirk Diggler.
#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I may change my dr handle to Buckner_F_Melton_Jr.

Bradford_Winston's rich uncle...

#18 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2019-12-06 11:49 AM | Reply

:FakeLawyer snowflake thread warning:

Russiapublicans always claim for be the victim.

#19 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-06 11:55 AM | Reply

"I'd like to ask you the reason, again, that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked. - #12 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-05 05:48 PM

Big surprise, you stopped paying attention to the testimony too soon. Mueller corrected that statement in the beginning of his next hearing:

In Mueller's opening statement that came later before the House Intelligence Committee, the former special counsel said he wanted to "correct the record" on his exchange with Lieu.
"That's not the correct way to say it," Mueller said. "We did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
That statement was more in line with his report, and with his earlier opening statement to the Judiciary Committee, where he said, "Based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness, we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the President committed a crime. That was our decision then and it remains our decision today."

www.nbcnews.com

#20 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-12-06 11:56 AM | Reply

Impeachment is a political process.

That it can and has been used in a partisan manner is not surprising.

If the Republicans want to make this impeachment less of a political process, then they should grow a spine and follow their oath instead of attacking the process, the witnesses, etc.

#21 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-12-06 12:31 PM | Reply

If the Republicans want to make this impeachment less of a political process, then they should grow a spine and follow their oath instead of attacking the process, the witnesses, etc.

#21 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2019-12-06 12:31 PM | FLAG: You mean 'witnesses' who did not witness something? .... and they should not be 'attacked'???

Still an impeachment in search of a crime.

#22 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-12-06 12:55 PM | Reply

Still an impeachment in search of a crime.

#22 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-12

Do you think that Trump's theft from veterans should be added in?

I'm curious. You're a veteran, did he steal from you?

#23 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-06 12:58 PM | Reply

@#22 ... Still an impeachment in search of a crime. ...

Do you think that a President using US taxpayer national security dollars for the benefit of his political re-election campaign is not a crime?

Indeed, the problem here is that there may have been too many crimes committed...

Even the Republican-chosen lawyer at the House Judiciary Committee hearing was not able to conjure up a full-throated case for there being no crime here. His big thing was that the Democrats are moving too quickly, and not allowing for Pres Trump's obstruction of Justice to slow them down.


#24 | Posted by lamplighter at 2019-12-06 02:07 PM | Reply

"a broad consensus of the American public"

The party that use 'super delegates' to chose their electable candidates has a different interpretation of that sentence.

#25 | Posted by 6thPersona at 2019-12-06 03:47 PM | Reply

Slippery slope as what goes around, comes around, eventually. Just remember how Reid's change of voting rule in the Senate ending up being beneficial for the Republicans.

#26 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-12-07 12:13 PM | Reply

# 26 -- that's been my point. The GOP is currently ceding all congressional oversight to Trump. He won't always be president and they'll be sorry when it's a Democrat using executive privilege to stonewall and obstruct. The precedent is being set. Thanks GOP you built that...

#27 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-07 02:37 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort