We're "human scum"...ggait wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 5:11 pm The "insultees" are really only about 25% of the country. But unfortunately 100% of the Reps in Congress.
70% of Americans know and say Trump did something. Among those 70%, most think Trump should be removed; a few think he should be impeached but not removed, and the remainder think he shouldn't be impeached -- maybe just censured.
The Reps in Congress are actually way way more supportive of Trump than the country generally is. 100% of the Rep Congress speaks like the 25% true believers -- denying reality and gaslighting about how Trump did absolutely nothing wrong.
Shows what the main problem of the GOP is -- there's no center right anymore. Folks Like Tom Ridge and Bill Cohen are no longer welcome -- they are ostracized as RINOs and elite deep staters. Worse than liberal fools!!
In contrast, the center left still drives the Dem bus. Biden+Mayor Pete+Bloomberg+Klobuchar >> Bern+Warren.
Trump's Russian Collusion
-
MDlaxfan76
- Posts: 27176
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
-
seacoaster
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
I really wasn't referring to Americans at large with that moniker. I was referring to a specific group of folks who, as a central part of their job, take an oath to defend, protect and comply with the Constitution of the United States. Here's the provenance of that oath:kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:43 pm More of the same - "DemShaming."
If you are 46% of the American people who don't agree with the 48% of the Dems out there you're spineless or...insert insult here.
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, ...and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3.
And it is a feature of federal statutory law (5 USC 3331):
"An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law."
And then this one (about the group to which I was referring, 2 USC 25):
"At the first session of Congress after every general election of Representatives, the oath of office shall be administered by any Member of the House of Representatives to the Speaker; and by the Speaker to all the Members and Delegates present, and to the Clerk, previous to entering on any other business; and to the Members and Delegates who afterward appear, previous to their taking their seats.
The Clerk of the House of Representatives of the Eightieth and each succeeding Congress shall cause the oath of office to be printed, furnishing two copies to each Member and Delegate who has taken the oath of office in accordance with law, which shall be subscribed in person by the Member or Delegate, who shall thereupon deliver them to the Clerk, one to be filed in the records of the House of Representatives, and the other to be recorded in the Journal of the House and in the Congressional Record; and such signed copies, or certified copies thereof, or of either of such records thereof, shall be admissible in evidence in any court of the United States, and shall be held conclusive proof of the fact that the signer duly took the oath of office in accordance with law."
The entire purpose of the oath was place the Taker in a position of understanding that nothing was more important in the carrying out of their offices and official duties. It was -- and I'd like to say, is -- in place and mandated to demonstrate the primacy of the the Constitution and the rule of law. Current events simply show -- and let's face it, there is no real argument here -- that the GOP members of the House and, apparently, the Senate have forgotten not only the oath but its purpose.
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Oaths are for liberal fools.
“I don’t take responsibility at all.” —Donald J Trump
-
seacoaster
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
“2016: GOP controlled Congress refused to help stop Putin’s attack on the U.S. election.
2017-2019: GOP controlled Senate helped Putin coverup his attack on the U.S. election.
2020: GOP Senators make it easy for Putin to attack our election and fail to hold Trump accountable.”
Alexandra Chalupa, calling out Moscow Mitch.
2017-2019: GOP controlled Senate helped Putin coverup his attack on the U.S. election.
2020: GOP Senators make it easy for Putin to attack our election and fail to hold Trump accountable.”
Alexandra Chalupa, calling out Moscow Mitch.
“I don’t take responsibility at all.” —Donald J Trump
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
.
. Joy to the World-
DocBarrister
- Posts: 6692
- Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:00 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Trump’s core MAGA base will stick with him to the end because ...
They are vulgar like Trump;
They are racist white supremacists like Trump;
They are ignorant like Trump;
They are stupid like Trump;
They are bigots like Trump;
They are misogynists like Trump;
They are dishonest like Trump; and
They are admirers of authoritarian dictators like Trump (note their admiration for Vladimir Putin).
His core supporters see themselves reflected in Trump. Everything the rest of us disparage about Trump, his core supporters perceive as a virtue.
In a real sense, Trump has done the nation a favor by exposing the ugly side of our country that is Trump’s America.
DocBarrister
They are vulgar like Trump;
They are racist white supremacists like Trump;
They are ignorant like Trump;
They are stupid like Trump;
They are bigots like Trump;
They are misogynists like Trump;
They are dishonest like Trump; and
They are admirers of authoritarian dictators like Trump (note their admiration for Vladimir Putin).
His core supporters see themselves reflected in Trump. Everything the rest of us disparage about Trump, his core supporters perceive as a virtue.
In a real sense, Trump has done the nation a favor by exposing the ugly side of our country that is Trump’s America.
DocBarrister
@DocBarrister
-
seacoaster
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
The historians weigh in:
https://medium.com/@historiansonimpeach ... 4ed2277b16
"...As Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, impeachment was designed to deal with “the misconduct of public men” which involves “the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Collectively, the President’s offenses, including his dereliction in protecting the integrity of the 2020 election from Russian disinformation and renewed interference, arouse once again the Framers’ most profound fears that powerful members of government would become, in Hamilton’s words, “the mercenary instruments of foreign corruption.”
It is our considered judgment that if President Trump’s misconduct does not rise to the level of impeachment, then virtually nothing does.
Hamilton understood, as he wrote in 1792, that the republic remained vulnerable to the rise of an unscrupulous demagogue, “unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents…despotic in his ordinary demeanour.” That demagogue, Hamilton said, could easily enough manage “to mount the hobby horse of popularity — to join in the cry of danger to liberty — to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion — to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day.” Such a figure, Hamilton wrote, would “throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’”
President Trump’s actions committed both before and during the House investigations fit Hamilton’s description and manifest utter and deliberate scorn for the rule of law and “repeated injuries” to constitutional democracy. That disregard continues and it constitutes a clear and present danger to the Constitution. We therefore strongly urge the House of Representatives to impeach the President."
https://medium.com/@historiansonimpeach ... 4ed2277b16
"...As Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, impeachment was designed to deal with “the misconduct of public men” which involves “the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Collectively, the President’s offenses, including his dereliction in protecting the integrity of the 2020 election from Russian disinformation and renewed interference, arouse once again the Framers’ most profound fears that powerful members of government would become, in Hamilton’s words, “the mercenary instruments of foreign corruption.”
It is our considered judgment that if President Trump’s misconduct does not rise to the level of impeachment, then virtually nothing does.
Hamilton understood, as he wrote in 1792, that the republic remained vulnerable to the rise of an unscrupulous demagogue, “unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents…despotic in his ordinary demeanour.” That demagogue, Hamilton said, could easily enough manage “to mount the hobby horse of popularity — to join in the cry of danger to liberty — to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion — to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day.” Such a figure, Hamilton wrote, would “throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’”
President Trump’s actions committed both before and during the House investigations fit Hamilton’s description and manifest utter and deliberate scorn for the rule of law and “repeated injuries” to constitutional democracy. That disregard continues and it constitutes a clear and present danger to the Constitution. We therefore strongly urge the House of Representatives to impeach the President."
-
seacoaster
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
seacoaster wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:27 am The historians weigh in:
https://medium.com/@historiansonimpeach ... 4ed2277b16
"...As Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, impeachment was designed to deal with “the misconduct of public men” which involves “the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Collectively, the President’s offenses, including his dereliction in protecting the integrity of the 2020 election from Russian disinformation and renewed interference, arouse once again the Framers’ most profound fears that powerful members of government would become, in Hamilton’s words, “the mercenary instruments of foreign corruption.”
It is our considered judgment that if President Trump’s misconduct does not rise to the level of impeachment, then virtually nothing does.
Hamilton understood, as he wrote in 1792, that the republic remained vulnerable to the rise of an unscrupulous demagogue, “unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents…despotic in his ordinary demeanour.” That demagogue, Hamilton said, could easily enough manage “to mount the hobby horse of popularity — to join in the cry of danger to liberty — to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion — to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day.” Such a figure, Hamilton wrote, would “throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’”
President Trump’s actions committed both before and during the House investigations fit Hamilton’s description and manifest utter and deliberate scorn for the rule of law and “repeated injuries” to constitutional democracy. That disregard continues and it constitutes a clear and present danger to the Constitution. We therefore strongly urge the House of Representatives to impeach the President."
-
seacoaster
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Thoughtful op-ed piece in the Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html
For this citizen, Southerner and mother, the crystallizing image of the impeachment season was the young son of Rep. Martha Roby (R-Ala), perched on her lap as she cast her Judiciary Committee vote Friday in support of President Trump. By presenting her son for the cameras, Roby sent two messages: (1) a vote to defend this president is a positive civics lesson for our children, and (2) Trump is a role model we should endorse for our growing boys.
Of all the dying things touched by this presidency, one of the more poignant for me is the South’s premium on personal decency. The gratuitous kindness routinely practiced by individual Southerners may have been compensation for gross societal evils (slavery and segregation), but it remained an outsize virtue in a low-self-esteem region and somehow helped rationalize America’s stubborn belief in its intrinsic goodness. Pondering the cold world that young Roby will shape as well as inherit took me back to an encounter I had several years ago with his grandfather, and the hard history it revisited and foretold.
Rep. Roby’s father is Joel Dubina, former chief judge of the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and co-author of the 2011 decision declaring Obamacare unconstitutional. The ruling was later reversed by the Supreme Court. We were at a professional-development conference for the 11th Circuit appellate bar in Montgomery, Ala., and I was the luncheon speaker in my capacity as a historian of civil rights in Alabama. Addressing the 11th Circuit was my Walter Mitty fantasy come true.
While writing an account of the civil rights struggle in my hometown of Birmingham, I would often ask myself what I would have done if I had been an adult back in the day. For the 1930s, I landed on labor organizer, and for the ’40s, a World War II fighter pilot. The 1950s and 1960s were simple, I told my audience: I would have been a judge on your court, back when it was still the 5th Circuit. (The 11th was created from the rib of the 5th in 1981.)
At the time of my talk, during our first black president’s second term, it was not so easy to recall the status quo that had made the 5th Circuit critical. Under Southern apartheid, segregation was a totalizing condition, forming and deforming every aspect of human existence, from what hospital you were born in to where you were buried — not just where you sat on the bus or what water fountain you drank from. The South was well down the road to totalitarianism, and the 5th Circuit — or, really, four of its judges — was the last local checkpoint.
Whether it was desegregating the University of Georgia or enjoining the state of Mississippi from prosecuting a civil rights activist for the crime of having been pistol-whipped by a white voting registrar, a commandment from the 5th Circuit Four said this: Halt; turn around; go back toward the United States of America. In May 1963, after a federal judge in Birmingham upheld the expulsion of more than 1,000 city schoolchildren for marching against segregation, Chief Judge Elbert Tuttle kept his 5th Circuit chambers in Atlanta open after hours until their NAACP attorney, Constance Baker Motley, could get there from Alabama. Tuttle sent the kids back to class, thus sparing a generation of rising citizens from the extra challenge of being high school dropouts.
After my talk, a white audience member wondered why the children couldn’t simply repeat the school year. And yes, the expulsion could be justified — the demonstrators had skipped school. But such failures of imagination still speak to the moral burden of the judiciary today. Is the court’s duty to ensure that the law is merely justifiable or that it is just? And do we want to live in a world where the last-resort arbiters of right and wrong hew to a strict, technical standard of “defensible”? That is the narrow, often procedural dodge of those who choose to abet wrongs without having to own them.
Later, a few appellate lawyers came up to confess how uncomfortable my talk had made them, even though they agreed with me. One had found himself furtively checking the reaction of the conservative judges. While those stone-faced men had no professional control over a historian, the attorneys acknowledged that they submitted to frequent self-censoring, lest they collide ideologically with a presiding judge. This, they understood, was the totalitarian mind-set I had just described, from back when their court was its antidote.
Unlike those lawyers, Martha Roby has no apparent practical concerns to account for her tribal compliance — no matter what deviancy her party deems defensible. She is not running for reelection. And I still have enough faith in Southern decency to believe that Roby — who briefly unendorsed Trump in the wake of the “Access Hollywood” tape — doesn’t really want her son to grow up to be just like him.
And yet, she showcases the boy as her impeachment-vote partner, reminding us that this long civil war is a national inheritance. Trumpism’s next generation will carry on the fight — against the Parkland survivors or the teenager the president tweet-baited for earning the cover of Time.
Person of the Year Greta Thunberg represents a cause that means life or death for our planet. With Trump, the stakes are merely democracy as we knew it. If we ever really did."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html
For this citizen, Southerner and mother, the crystallizing image of the impeachment season was the young son of Rep. Martha Roby (R-Ala), perched on her lap as she cast her Judiciary Committee vote Friday in support of President Trump. By presenting her son for the cameras, Roby sent two messages: (1) a vote to defend this president is a positive civics lesson for our children, and (2) Trump is a role model we should endorse for our growing boys.
Of all the dying things touched by this presidency, one of the more poignant for me is the South’s premium on personal decency. The gratuitous kindness routinely practiced by individual Southerners may have been compensation for gross societal evils (slavery and segregation), but it remained an outsize virtue in a low-self-esteem region and somehow helped rationalize America’s stubborn belief in its intrinsic goodness. Pondering the cold world that young Roby will shape as well as inherit took me back to an encounter I had several years ago with his grandfather, and the hard history it revisited and foretold.
Rep. Roby’s father is Joel Dubina, former chief judge of the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and co-author of the 2011 decision declaring Obamacare unconstitutional. The ruling was later reversed by the Supreme Court. We were at a professional-development conference for the 11th Circuit appellate bar in Montgomery, Ala., and I was the luncheon speaker in my capacity as a historian of civil rights in Alabama. Addressing the 11th Circuit was my Walter Mitty fantasy come true.
While writing an account of the civil rights struggle in my hometown of Birmingham, I would often ask myself what I would have done if I had been an adult back in the day. For the 1930s, I landed on labor organizer, and for the ’40s, a World War II fighter pilot. The 1950s and 1960s were simple, I told my audience: I would have been a judge on your court, back when it was still the 5th Circuit. (The 11th was created from the rib of the 5th in 1981.)
At the time of my talk, during our first black president’s second term, it was not so easy to recall the status quo that had made the 5th Circuit critical. Under Southern apartheid, segregation was a totalizing condition, forming and deforming every aspect of human existence, from what hospital you were born in to where you were buried — not just where you sat on the bus or what water fountain you drank from. The South was well down the road to totalitarianism, and the 5th Circuit — or, really, four of its judges — was the last local checkpoint.
Whether it was desegregating the University of Georgia or enjoining the state of Mississippi from prosecuting a civil rights activist for the crime of having been pistol-whipped by a white voting registrar, a commandment from the 5th Circuit Four said this: Halt; turn around; go back toward the United States of America. In May 1963, after a federal judge in Birmingham upheld the expulsion of more than 1,000 city schoolchildren for marching against segregation, Chief Judge Elbert Tuttle kept his 5th Circuit chambers in Atlanta open after hours until their NAACP attorney, Constance Baker Motley, could get there from Alabama. Tuttle sent the kids back to class, thus sparing a generation of rising citizens from the extra challenge of being high school dropouts.
After my talk, a white audience member wondered why the children couldn’t simply repeat the school year. And yes, the expulsion could be justified — the demonstrators had skipped school. But such failures of imagination still speak to the moral burden of the judiciary today. Is the court’s duty to ensure that the law is merely justifiable or that it is just? And do we want to live in a world where the last-resort arbiters of right and wrong hew to a strict, technical standard of “defensible”? That is the narrow, often procedural dodge of those who choose to abet wrongs without having to own them.
Later, a few appellate lawyers came up to confess how uncomfortable my talk had made them, even though they agreed with me. One had found himself furtively checking the reaction of the conservative judges. While those stone-faced men had no professional control over a historian, the attorneys acknowledged that they submitted to frequent self-censoring, lest they collide ideologically with a presiding judge. This, they understood, was the totalitarian mind-set I had just described, from back when their court was its antidote.
Unlike those lawyers, Martha Roby has no apparent practical concerns to account for her tribal compliance — no matter what deviancy her party deems defensible. She is not running for reelection. And I still have enough faith in Southern decency to believe that Roby — who briefly unendorsed Trump in the wake of the “Access Hollywood” tape — doesn’t really want her son to grow up to be just like him.
And yet, she showcases the boy as her impeachment-vote partner, reminding us that this long civil war is a national inheritance. Trumpism’s next generation will carry on the fight — against the Parkland survivors or the teenager the president tweet-baited for earning the cover of Time.
Person of the Year Greta Thunberg represents a cause that means life or death for our planet. With Trump, the stakes are merely democracy as we knew it. If we ever really did."
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
“All it takes is 20 sane Republican senators who prefer Mike Pence to this chaos and it’s all over for @realDonaldTrump.“
Richard Painter, Bush Admin lawyer
Richard Painter, Bush Admin lawyer
“I don’t take responsibility at all.” —Donald J Trump
-
MDlaxfan76
- Posts: 27176
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
I don't like her show, too hyper partisan and unlike hyper partisan Maddow, not a great story teller.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 9:39 pm.
She's sweating a 2020 refusal to go. Certainly it would be rational for Trump to fear being out of office as he will most assuredly face criminal action for what is already known, much less what is still hidden. However, a refusal to go, not likely.
I think it's fair to be concerned about what lengths he and the Trumpist RNC will do to hold onto power through voter suppression by removing registered voters from the rolls and changing rules about voting locations etc, through welcoming assistance from Russia et al, and even the physical intimidation of voters, but I doubt Trump would have consolidated enough power to have the chutzpa to seriously try to stay in office if he loses. He'll try instead to whip up victimhood and outrage, 'system is rigged', for the benefit of a far right media play business. I think it's reasonable to be concerned about violence in the streets. But he goes if he loses, the GOP is not yet at a place where they'd uniformly protect him in staying.
I do think, however, that it far from a foregone conclusion as to what Trump would do post 2024, assuming he has those additional 4 years to further consolidate power. And assuming he has the physical capacity to continue health wise and wishes to do so.
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Raskin just punched his ticket to be a House Manager.
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Impeach & Remove! Lock him up!
It has been proven a hundred times that the surest way to the heart of any man, black or white, honest or dishonest, is through justice and fairness.
Charles Francis "Socker" Coe, Esq
Charles Francis "Socker" Coe, Esq
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Trump letter to Pelosi. Looks like he had a pretty significant hand in the drafting of it, as the language sure sounds like him. Methinks this impeachment thing is getting under his skin a bit.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u ... -final.pdf
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u ... -final.pdf
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Pelosi gave the letter to the janitorial staff and asked that it be put in the supply closet, in the toilet paper section.
-
hooligan88
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 11:38 am
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
How ignorant!! No wonder Bandito goes nuts!!DocBarrister wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 11:07 pm Trump’s core MAGA base will stick with him to the end because ...
They are vulgar like Trump;
They are racist white supremacists like Trump;
They are ignorant like Trump;
They are stupid like Trump;
They are bigots like Trump;
They are misogynists like Trump;
They are dishonest like Trump; and
They are admirers of authoritarian dictators like Trump (note their admiration for Vladimir Putin).
His core supporters see themselves reflected in Trump. Everything the rest of us disparage about Trump, his core supporters perceive as a virtue.
In a real sense, Trump has done the nation a favor by exposing the ugly side of our country that is Trump’s America.
DocBarrister
-
Typical Lax Dad
- Posts: 34245
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Was it in crayon?njbill wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:38 pm Trump letter to Pelosi. Looks like he had a pretty significant hand in the drafting of it, as the language sure sounds like him. Methinks this impeachment thing is getting under his skin a bit.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u ... -final.pdf
“I wish you would!”
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
The silver lining to impeachment -- the (D)'s are using the process to placate their base, while being forced to act on other things (trade agreements, spending bills), yielding the possibility of not needing a continuing resolution -- making DoD's readiness, contracting, acquisition, & operational planning much more predictable & cost effective. The Pentagon's saying -- this impeachment farce is a good diversion for the clowns & political hacks, soaking up all the MSM's attention, allowing us to concentrate on the mission.
-
seacoaster
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: IMPEACHMENT ... If not now, WHEN?
Op-Ed from a bunch of crybabies who can't get over the fact that Hillary lost and who got mad when Mick said "get over it" and who have TDS:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opin ... oject.html
"Patriotism and the survival of our nation in the face of the crimes, corruption and corrosive nature of Donald Trump are a higher calling than mere politics. As Americans, we must stem the damage he and his followers are doing to the rule of law, the Constitution and the American character.
That’s why we are announcing the Lincoln Project, an effort to highlight our country’s story and values, and its people’s sacrifices and obligations. This effort transcends partisanship and is dedicated to nothing less than preservation of the principles that so many have fought for, on battlefields far from home and within their own communities.
This effort asks all Americans of all places, creeds and ways of life to join in the seminal task of our generation: restoring to this nation leadership and governance that respects the rule of law, recognizes the dignity of all people and defends the Constitution and American values at home and abroad.
Over these next 11 months, our efforts will be dedicated to defeating President Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box and to elect those patriots who will hold the line. We do not undertake this task lightly, nor from ideological preference. We have been, and remain, broadly conservative (or classically liberal) in our politics and outlooks. Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain, but our shared fidelity to the Constitution dictates a common effort.
The 2020 general election, by every indication, will be about persuasion, with turnout expected to be at record highs. Our efforts are aimed at persuading enough disaffected conservatives, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents in swing states and districts to help ensure a victory in the Electoral College, and congressional majorities that don’t enable or abet Mr. Trump’s violations of the Constitution, even if that means Democratic control of the Senate and an expanded Democratic majority in the House.
The American presidency transcends the individuals who occupy the Oval Office. Their personality becomes part of our national character. Their actions become our actions, for which we all share responsibility. Their willingness to act in accordance with the law and our tradition dictate how current and future leaders will act. Their commitment to order, civility and decency are reflected in American society.
Mr. Trump fails to meet the bar for this commitment. He has neither the moral compass nor the temperament to serve. His vision is limited to what immediately faces him — the problems and risks he chronically brings upon himself and for which others, from countless contractors and companies to the American people, ultimately bear the heaviest burden.
But this president’s actions are possible only with the craven acquiescence of congressional Republicans. They have done no less than abdicate their Article I responsibilities.
Indeed, national Republicans have done far worse than simply march along to Mr. Trump’s beat. Their defense of him is imbued with an ugliness, a meanness and a willingness to attack and slander those who have shed blood for our country, who have dedicated their lives and careers to its defense and its security, and whose job is to preserve the nation’s status as a beacon of hope.
Congressional Republicans have embraced and copied Mr. Trump’s cruelty and defended and even adopted his corruption. Mr. Trump and his enablers have abandoned conservatism and longstanding Republican principles and replaced it with Trumpism, an empty faith led by a bogus prophet. In a recent survey, a majority of Republican voters reported that they consider Mr. Trump a better president than Lincoln.
Mr. Trump and his fellow travelers daily undermine the proposition we as a people have a responsibility and an obligation to continually bend the arc of history toward justice. They mock our belief in America as something more meaningful than lines on a map.
Our peril far outstrips any past differences: It has arrived at our collective doorstep, and we believe there is no other choice. We sincerely hope, but are not optimistic, that some of those Republicans charged with sitting as jurors in a likely Senate impeachment trial will do likewise.
American men and women stand ready around the globe to defend us and our way of life. We must do right by them and ensure that the country for which they daily don their uniform deserves their protection and their sacrifice.
We are reminded of Dan Sickles, an incompetent 19th-century New York politician. On July 2, 1863, his blundering nearly ended the United States.
(Sickles’s greatest previous achievement had been fatally shooting his wife’s lover across the street from the White House and getting himself elected to Congress. Even his most fervent admirers could not have imagined that one day, far in the future, another incompetent New York politician, a president, would lay claim to that legacy by saying he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it.)
On that day in Pennsylvania, Sickles was a major general commanding the Union Army’s III Corps at the Battle of Gettysburg, and his incompetence wrought chaos and danger. The Confederate Army took advantage, and turned the Union line. Had the rebel soldiers broken through, the continent might have been divided: free and slave, democratic and authoritarian.
Another Union general, Winfield Scott Hancock, had only minutes to reinforce the line. America, the nation, the ideal, hung in the balance. Amid the fury of battle, he found the First Minnesota Volunteers.
They charged, and many of them fell, suffering a staggeringly high casualty rate. They held the line. They saved the Union. Four months later, Lincoln stood on that field of slaughter and said, “It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.”
We look to Lincoln as our guide and inspiration. He understood the necessity of not just saving the Union, but also of knitting the nation back together spiritually as well as politically. But those wounds can be bound up only once the threat has been defeated. So, too, will our country have to knit itself back together after the scourge of Trumpism has been overcome."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opin ... oject.html
"Patriotism and the survival of our nation in the face of the crimes, corruption and corrosive nature of Donald Trump are a higher calling than mere politics. As Americans, we must stem the damage he and his followers are doing to the rule of law, the Constitution and the American character.
That’s why we are announcing the Lincoln Project, an effort to highlight our country’s story and values, and its people’s sacrifices and obligations. This effort transcends partisanship and is dedicated to nothing less than preservation of the principles that so many have fought for, on battlefields far from home and within their own communities.
This effort asks all Americans of all places, creeds and ways of life to join in the seminal task of our generation: restoring to this nation leadership and governance that respects the rule of law, recognizes the dignity of all people and defends the Constitution and American values at home and abroad.
Over these next 11 months, our efforts will be dedicated to defeating President Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box and to elect those patriots who will hold the line. We do not undertake this task lightly, nor from ideological preference. We have been, and remain, broadly conservative (or classically liberal) in our politics and outlooks. Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain, but our shared fidelity to the Constitution dictates a common effort.
The 2020 general election, by every indication, will be about persuasion, with turnout expected to be at record highs. Our efforts are aimed at persuading enough disaffected conservatives, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents in swing states and districts to help ensure a victory in the Electoral College, and congressional majorities that don’t enable or abet Mr. Trump’s violations of the Constitution, even if that means Democratic control of the Senate and an expanded Democratic majority in the House.
The American presidency transcends the individuals who occupy the Oval Office. Their personality becomes part of our national character. Their actions become our actions, for which we all share responsibility. Their willingness to act in accordance with the law and our tradition dictate how current and future leaders will act. Their commitment to order, civility and decency are reflected in American society.
Mr. Trump fails to meet the bar for this commitment. He has neither the moral compass nor the temperament to serve. His vision is limited to what immediately faces him — the problems and risks he chronically brings upon himself and for which others, from countless contractors and companies to the American people, ultimately bear the heaviest burden.
But this president’s actions are possible only with the craven acquiescence of congressional Republicans. They have done no less than abdicate their Article I responsibilities.
Indeed, national Republicans have done far worse than simply march along to Mr. Trump’s beat. Their defense of him is imbued with an ugliness, a meanness and a willingness to attack and slander those who have shed blood for our country, who have dedicated their lives and careers to its defense and its security, and whose job is to preserve the nation’s status as a beacon of hope.
Congressional Republicans have embraced and copied Mr. Trump’s cruelty and defended and even adopted his corruption. Mr. Trump and his enablers have abandoned conservatism and longstanding Republican principles and replaced it with Trumpism, an empty faith led by a bogus prophet. In a recent survey, a majority of Republican voters reported that they consider Mr. Trump a better president than Lincoln.
Mr. Trump and his fellow travelers daily undermine the proposition we as a people have a responsibility and an obligation to continually bend the arc of history toward justice. They mock our belief in America as something more meaningful than lines on a map.
Our peril far outstrips any past differences: It has arrived at our collective doorstep, and we believe there is no other choice. We sincerely hope, but are not optimistic, that some of those Republicans charged with sitting as jurors in a likely Senate impeachment trial will do likewise.
American men and women stand ready around the globe to defend us and our way of life. We must do right by them and ensure that the country for which they daily don their uniform deserves their protection and their sacrifice.
We are reminded of Dan Sickles, an incompetent 19th-century New York politician. On July 2, 1863, his blundering nearly ended the United States.
(Sickles’s greatest previous achievement had been fatally shooting his wife’s lover across the street from the White House and getting himself elected to Congress. Even his most fervent admirers could not have imagined that one day, far in the future, another incompetent New York politician, a president, would lay claim to that legacy by saying he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it.)
On that day in Pennsylvania, Sickles was a major general commanding the Union Army’s III Corps at the Battle of Gettysburg, and his incompetence wrought chaos and danger. The Confederate Army took advantage, and turned the Union line. Had the rebel soldiers broken through, the continent might have been divided: free and slave, democratic and authoritarian.
Another Union general, Winfield Scott Hancock, had only minutes to reinforce the line. America, the nation, the ideal, hung in the balance. Amid the fury of battle, he found the First Minnesota Volunteers.
They charged, and many of them fell, suffering a staggeringly high casualty rate. They held the line. They saved the Union. Four months later, Lincoln stood on that field of slaughter and said, “It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.”
We look to Lincoln as our guide and inspiration. He understood the necessity of not just saving the Union, but also of knitting the nation back together spiritually as well as politically. But those wounds can be bound up only once the threat has been defeated. So, too, will our country have to knit itself back together after the scourge of Trumpism has been overcome."