See behind the impeachment stories to learn about America

Summary: Look behind the partisan bickering about impeaching Trump to see the powerful lessons we can learn from it. The GOP and Dem narratives hide more than they reveal, because in ClownWorld nothing is what it seems.

Once there was a great nation that entered into the Crazy Years, Robert Heinlein predicted sixty years ago. America was weak, after decades of social turmoil. We quickly collapsed into the Weimerica-like situation called ClownWorld. This is the background to the headlines in every day’s news. Rule One in ClownWorld: nothing is what it seems.

My previous post about impeachment described how making it a normal tool of politics would be a useful reform. But in ClownWorld, Trump’s impeachment is a shallow political ploy designed to discredit Trump in the 2020 elections. Its effectiveness requires cooperation of two groups, neither of which can puncture the Democrat’s narrative. First, the major news media (from partisanship). Second, Team Trump (from incompetence). Here is what neither will tell you.

“Ignore the hype. This is not an impeachment inquiry.”

by Andrew McCarthy (former Federal prosecutor) in an op-ed at The Hill.

“You are not to be faulted if you think a formal inquest is under way and that legal process has been issued. The misimpression is completely understandable if you have been taking in media coverage. In particular, reporting on a haughty Sept. 27 letter from House Democrats, presuming to direct Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, on pain of citation for obstruction, to cooperate in their demands to depose State Department officials and review various records. The letter is signed by not one but three committee chairmen. …

“What is portrayed as an “impeachment inquiry” is actually just a made-for-cable-TV political soap opera. The House of Representatives is not conducting a formal impeachment inquiry. To the contrary, congressional Democrats are conducting the 2020 political campaign. The House has not voted as a body to authorize an impeachment inquiry. What we have are partisan theatrics, proceeding under the ipse dixit of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. …

“Moreover, there are no subpoenas. As Secretary Pompeo observed in his fittingly tart response on Tuesday, what the committee chairmen issued was merely a letter. Its huffing and puffing notwithstanding, the letter is nothing more than an informal request for voluntary cooperation. Legally, it has no compulsive power. If anything, it is rife with legal deficiencies.

“The Democrats, of course, hope you don’t notice that the House is not conducting a formal impeachment inquiry. They are using the guise of frenetic activity by several standing committees – Intelligence, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, Oversight and Reform, Financial Services, and Ways and Means – whose normal oversight functions are being gussied up to look like serious impeachment business.

“But standing committees do have subpoena power, so why not use it? Well, because subpoenas get litigated in court when the people or agencies on the receiving end object. Democrats want to have an impeachment show …on television; they do not want to defend its bona fides in court. …any reasonable judge asked to weigh the demands for information presented to Pompeo would not give them the time of day. {Without a House vote authorizing the inquiry they} do not reflect the judgment of the House.”

————————–

Look deeper. See more.

It is vital that you not see that the accusations against Trump, even if true, are trivial compared to Obama’s. He explicitly authorized assassinations (his “kill list”). He then took a giant step towards tyranny by authorizing the assassination of a US citizen without trial or even warrant. See the details here. This violated not only American law, but also Magna Carta. This might be the most serious Presidential “innovation” in our history. This was an obvious basis for impeachment.

It is vital that you not see the role of Ukraine in recent American politics. How Trump’s relations with it contradict the “agent of Putin” theory. The obvious corruption of payments to Hunter Biden and his father’s apparent support for them. It is a long complex story. Here is one version of it, told by Graham J. Noble at Liberty Nation. I have found no evidence of a past investigation into these things. Expect no future investigation.

It is vital that you not show any interest in the massive donations to the Clinton Foundation by unlikely foreigners. Or why Hillary’s minion permanently erased more than 30 thousand emails using BleachBit – after they had been subpoenaed by Congress (details here).

It is vital that you not know about the Uranium One deal, with the massive donations to the Clinton Foundation by unlikely philanthropists.

The common element of the last three is that massive sums of money was given to powerful American officials (or their family, or foundation) around the same time as decisions were made (or could be made) helping the benefactors. There are three keys to success: do it in plain sight and have the major media assure the public that there is nothing to see. By the nature of these transactions, nothing can be proven if they are conducted with a modest degree of security (Clinton’s emails might have been a mistake, but were easily deleted without consequences). The third key to success: have a gullible citizenry that believes what they are told and shows no interest even in the most blatant and lucrative conflicts of interest.

Beyond these basic facts, there is so much we do not know. The oddity is that Team Trump could effectively deploy much of this – indicators of malfeasance or corruption – in his defense (Tweets don’t count). But he does not. Add that to the list of mysteries.

But those who have paid attention in the Trump years have learned much that was hidden about both of the teams running America. We will learn more, but probably not as much as we need to. But none of what we learn will do us any good unless we put what we learn to work. Information can arouse us and guide our actions. Or we can treat it as infotainment, like watching clowns at the circus. Then the joke will be on us.

For More Information

Ideas! See my recommended books and films at Amazon.

The best summary I have seen of UkraineGate: “A Weak Whistleblower, a Ridiculous Impeachment” by Peter van Buren at The American Conservative – “This isn’t about the law; it’s about circumventing another vote by the deplorables in 2020.”

About the mechanics of impeachment.

• For a detailed analysis of the 25th Amendment: “Presidential Succession and Inability: Before and After the Twenty-Fifth Amendment” by John D. Feerick (Prof Law, Fordham Law School), Fordham Law Review, 2011.
• Important: “Impeachment and Removal” by Jared P. Cole and Todd Garvey (Legislative Attorneys) of the Congressional Research Service, 29 October 2015.
• “So what exactly counts as an impeachable offense?” by Keith E. Whittington in the WaPo, May 2017.
• “What Are Impeachable Offenses?” – book reviews by Noah Feldman and Jacob Weisberg in the NY Review of Books, Sept 2017.
• The WaPo describes the other way to replace a President (it was popular for a while): “Trump opponents have rediscovered the 25th Amendment. Here is what you should know about it.“

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about the Constitution, about ways to reform America, about Trump and the new populism, about Russiagate, and especially these…

1. Why do Democrats want to impeach Trump?
2. The amazing Trump-Ukraine-Whistleblower story in a nutshell.
3. The best analysis of RussiaGate: its effects & results – By Emmet T. Flood, special counsel to the President.
4. Reviewing “Ball of Collusion”, the big book of 2019 about RussiaGate.
5. Impeachment = reform of our antique political system.

Recommended books about the Republic.

The Executive Unbound: After the Madisonian Republic by Eric Posner, professor of law at U of Chicago. He wants an imperial presidency. He wants to put us on the fast track to fall of the Constitution.

Impeachment: A Citizen’s Guide by Cass R. Sunstein, professor of law at Harvard (2017). A measured and comprehensive look at this critical and seldom discussed (until recently) subject.