We’ve seen the Mueller Report come and go. We’ve seen “Russia, Russia, Russia” come–and go. Yes, the Russians are bad hombres. Yes, President Trump’s seeming buddy-buddy relationship with Vladimir Putin (which I’m not sure Putin shares), and his warm hugs with Kim Jong-un (which I’m not sure Kim shares) are troubling, if taken as a sign of devotion to those tyrants.
But aside from, as Erick calls them, “mean tweets,” and throwing raw meat to his rally fans, President Trump has done nothing worthy of impeachment. Democrats would impeach the president for things done before he was president. They’d impeach him for wearing too much fake tan, for his hair style, for cheating at golf, for telling whoppers from behind a microphone, as a candidate and as president.
None of those things are impeachable, as the “answer” to Trump.
Should the United States of America pursue a coup d’etat? Should the cabinet gather and invoke the 4th article of the 25th Amendment? If Trump was truly as racist, dangerous, Hitler-like, fascist, and evil as his critics claim, wouldn’t sanity suggest that law-abiding, truth-respecting, reasonable people would have taken the legal measures to remove him?
Are General Mattis, General Kelly, General McMaster, former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and the entire curtain-call of Trump’s former cabinet members such rubes and cowards that they could not remove a man that the entire Democratic Party wants gone, and like Pavlov’s dog salivates at the term “impeachment?”
The “answer” to President Trump, a new and disruptive kind of president, representing a new and disruptive form of politics, is found at the ballot box.
And the ballot box will not be judged completely on style points. There will be points given for policy, for results, for the economy, for the paychecks in voters’ pockets, for law and order, and for calling out, in tweets, shocking problems that have festered through many administrations while receiving spasms of press coverage, only to sink into anonymity once again.
When Benjamin Wittes, whom I respect, can tweet “the more inevitable impeachment becomes as a remedy for the president’s behavior,” I have to wonder how that thought arises?
Are we now to be led by an elite who decides what behavior and social faux pas are worthy of impeachment? Are we to expand the limits of legislative prerogative to include “mean tweets” and “crazy uncle” stories at rallies? Are we to remove a president because we don’t like the form of his political disruption?
I have issues with Donald Trump as a person. I have written 100,000-plus words about him going back years. I don’t fully trust him to deliver the things he promises, but he has delivered on many things that surprise me.
The ballot box will–and should–decide the “answer” to Donald Trump on November 3, 2020. Given where the Democratic Party is going, Trump may very well win another term. It won’t be his style that wins it, but his style may have many years of resonance in American politics.
Let the voters decide that, and let’s move past the “failed presidency” talk. I’m sure we won’t, at least on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and the like, because, well, like Trump, they are interested in ratings, and bashing Trump for being Trump is good TV.
But as Leslie Moonves admitted a few years ago (to paraphrase): what’s good TV isn’t really what’s good for America. Impeachment is bad for America. Elections are good. The inevitable remedy, as Wittes puts it, is not impeachment. It’s the ballot box.