In the 240+ year history of our country, there has never been a President impeached -- that is to say, actually removed from office. Nixon mostly likely would have been, justifiably so. And I know it's trendy in the media to say there were two other Presidents technically impeached, but that's not really true. The House passed Articles of Impeachment against Andrew Johnson in 1868, and against Bill Clinton in 1998. Neither time did the Senate ultimately vote to remove the President from office.
And so, in the nearly 250 years of America, there has never been a President who's done something bad enough to actually get impeached. And there's been some pretty nefarious characters in the office who have done some pretty nefarious things while in office. It's never happened.
And yet, this -- THIS, a phone call -- is what the Democrats now want us to believe is worthy of an impeachment. 250 years of history, never having a valid reason to remove a President from office, and this is what they want us to believe rises to the level of an actual impeachment.
It's absurd, of course. Bonkers, lunatic, insane, and any other word you wanna drop on it. But they're pursuing it, nonetheless. The Democrats want you to believe that despite some various slime bags who have been President over the past two centuries, this lone act -- a President making a phone call to another country's President -- is an impeachable offense.
Now, before you Liberal's go into a tizzy and try to conjure up things that aren't there, remember that this really is just about a phone call. We know all there is to know about it because Donald Trump himself released the transcript of the call. And despite Adam Schiff's ridiculously fabricated account of what's in the call, there is nothing in it impeachable. The Dems know this, but that isn't stopping them.
Everything else is made up. There's no obstruction, because there isn't an investigation into any formal charges to obstruct. There isn't a quid pro quo because there is no evidence anywhere whatsoever that Trump threatened to withhold any funds from Ukraine in exchange for a favor. The Ukraine President himself has said multiple times that he hasn't been propositioned with anything. The "favor" Trump mentions in the transcript is asking a foreign government to investigate corruption within their government, which Trump is well within his rights to do, and Presidents ask that of other foreign officials all the time. It might be politically expedient, but it is absolutely irrelevant that a current Presidential candidate happens to be at the center of that corruption. Biden's involvement in this whole mess most certainly warrants an investigation. If you wanted Trump investigated for collusion with a foreign country when there was no such evidence to warrant the investigation, wouldn't you also want a Presidential candidate investigated for any potential corruption with a foreign country when there's loads of information worthy of being looked in to?
Please don't try to tell me we all "think we know" what President Trump meant. That's not how it works. Our justice system -- and certainly the impeachment of a President -- isn't about what we "think" or what we "feel." It is based on facts, and evidence, and truth, and what can be proven. Asking a political ally in another country for a favor isn't against the law, let alone impeachable.
Trump not helping in the investigation is not the same thing as obstruction. Legally, he does not have to give them anything, or give them access to anything or anyone to prove his innocence. The system doesn't work that way. The prosecution has to come up with enough evidence to provide a case to try to prove a crime. That's how it works. So please don't try to convince us that if Trump didn't have anything to hide, he'd give them access to this and that. Trump doesn't have to give them squat.
And while we're on the subject, let's look at the other two times the House passed Articles of Impeachment on a President. Both were motivated by political bias, but both had sound foundations of misconduct from the President.
The first time was in 1868. The United States was as divided as ever following the Civil War, and the disdain between the two political parties was at an all-time high. In short, Johnson didn't handle the reconstruction of the Union following the war in a manner that satisfied either side. And when he fell afoul of laws that were passed specifically to trip him up, The House impeached him. Even then, the crimes of which he was accused weren't significant enough for the Republican-led Senate to convict him, as they rightfully understood that you couldn't just impeach a President because you didn't like him or his policies. He actually had to commit a crime.
But the more important thing to remember was, while unliked by both parties by that time, the effort to remove him wasn't self-serving. Johnson stood virtually no chance of winning another term, and the next election was just a couple months away. The Dems didn't like him, and indeed, he wasn't even their nomination for the job. Regardless, there was no way he or any other Democrat was beating the Republican Ulysses Grant in the election. So impeaching Johnson just to get rid of him was pointless, because he was gonna be gone in a few months anyway.
Flash forward to 1998. Bill Clinton was in his final term, with just under two years left on his administration. Defending a sexual assault lawsuit by Paula Jones, Clinton had lied -- under oath -- about his activities with Monica Lewinsky. We know this because he admitted it. Lying under oath is perjury, and it is a serious crime, especially for a President. The House passed the Articles, and then the Senate acquitted him, with all 45 Dems, not seeing perjury as any sort of big deal, voting not guilty.
Again, as with Johnson 100 years earlier, Clinton was on his way out. The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress -- they had for most of his term -- and would until it's conclusion. He couldn't run again and the Republicans pretty much controlled anything he could do anyway. So the motivation wasn't so much in getting rid of Clinton as it was to actually punish him for a crime, which he had openly admitted to committing.
In both cases, as well as with Nixon, when you look at the big picture politically, the motivation for impeachment wasn't so much to rid themselves of someone they didn't like as it was to actually punish them for a crime. All three were guilty of the crime, there's little question to that. The question was whether or not the crime itself actually rose to the definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors." Again, in Nixon's case, it likely would have, but in the other two, it did not.
This nonsense surrounding Trump right now is an entirely different matter altogether. From the moment he took office, the Dems entire existence -- even stated publicly as such -- has been to rid themselves of Donald Trump. On one hand, it has very little to do with him personally. They fear his policies, and mostly, his Federal Court nominations, including his picks for the Supreme Court. The Dems have a lot on the line with their way of life, and a Republican President, no matter who it is, can alter that for them for generations to come with his court picks. We saw this in the insanity surrounding Judge Kavanaugh's nomination. Another four years of a Republican administration could prove devastating to Liberal ideology, and if truth be known, this is likely the primary motivation behind the attempts to oust him.
On the other hand, they hate that a non-politician has come in and shaken up things so much. It tips the balance of power away from the politician and puts it more firmly back into the hands of the people, and that's problematic for them as well. It doesn't help that someone they see as a complete hack came in made them all look like fools by winning the Presidency.
So while it all has very little to do with Donald Trump personally, the moves are regardless centered around removing him from power, rather than actually punishing him for a crime. From the outset, highlighted by the years-long, multi-million dollar investigation of Russian collusion, the Dems sole purpose for existence has been to get rid of Donald Trump, by any means necessary. They've done nothing legislatively since taking over control of the House in 2018. All they've done is launch investigation after investigation.
It's a coup attempt. They can't win at the polls, and they can't launch a military coup. So they attempt a political coup. Attacking him, attacking his policies, attacking his administration and personnel, attacking his nominations, completely fabricating accusations and crimes, labeling him everything from a racist to a bigot to a homophobe to a white supremacist, to now launching an impeachment investigation because of a phone call, the motivations are clear. Get rid of Trump and take back the power.
They panicked with Judge Kavanaugh, because they knew they couldn't prevent his confirmation before the election and a new Congress took over in 2019. So they flipped out and completely made up the sexual allegations, all of which have since been proven false.
Now, they already know they won't beat him in the election in 2020, so they have to find another way to get him out. And even though there's no chance this Senate votes to impeach him, and even though they really don't want Trump to be able to call witnesses and cross examine others for what it will bring to light on the Dems, they are desperate. The hope isn't to get him impeached. They know there's no chance of that happening. The hope is making him look just bad enough that the voters will turn on him.
Of course, the problem in that logic is this: They are clueless as to how he won the election in 2016, and they are still clueless as to his enduring popularity. This impeachment nonsense, as with all the other ridiculous allegations and investigations of the past two years, is not swaying a single Trump supporter. It is doing the exact opposite. It is galvanizing them. The only people we hear screaming about impeachment in the news every day are people who already hated him to begin with. They weren't his supporters in 2016, and they won't be his supporters in 2020.
His supporters, meanwhile, are sitting back and watching this circus play out and being reminded every day of why they voted for him in the first place.
So not only are the accusations themselves bogus, but the reasoning behind making them at all is bogus as well.
I asked a dear Liberal friend of mine the other day how he can wake up every day hating someone so much that they are willing to support false accusations, lies, hearsay, and in the case of Judge Kavanaugh, the potential ruin of other's lives. How sad it must be to be so consumed with hatred for someone that one is willing to resort to illegal activity to see that person gone. I cannot imagine my mind being filled with that much hatred every day, all day.
As he has done with all the other allegations, he'll come through this one, and in a couple months, they'll be on to something else. I mean, heard anything about Russian collusion and Robert Mueller in the news lately? Any Dems screaming about the Wall, or children in cages, or white supremacy lately?
After 2020, you will see a significant change in Democrat strategy. They'll give up on Donald Trump and the attacks will begin on the ideals they believe the 2024 Republican nominee will try to advance, most notably, Christianity and religious freedom.
In some ways, it will be a relief to have much of the insanity we're seeing right now come to an end. But in other ways, the attacks on our freedoms and spiritual beliefs will be much, much worse. Significantly darker and harsher.
You think they're acting badly now...
