Former George W. Bush speechwriter and current conservative columnist Marc A. Thiessen seems to be taking a course in Wishful Thinking 101 right now, given his most recent Press Herald piece, "Mueller probe could turn out to be a disaster - for the Democrats."
Thiessen starts his column with this:
"All of Washington is focused on the political peril President Trump faces from Robert Mueller's investigation. But the Mueller probe could very well turn out to be a disaster, not for Trump, but for the Democrats."
...and that's where we begin. Okay, Mr. Thiessen, let's hear your attempt at hypothetical rationalization, as if there were such a thing...
"The Special counsel was appointed to investigate whether Trump engaged in criminal conspiracy with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election. If Mueller finds incontrovertible evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, then the president will be - and should be - removed from office. But it is also possible that Mueller will not find evidence that Trump conspired with Russia, and that Mueller or federal prosecutors in New York's Southern District will find evidence for some other charge unrelated to a conspiracy with Russia - such as Trump's hush-money payments to alleged former mistresses or crimes related to Trump's family business."
Are you going the Rudy Giuliani "truth-isn't-truth" route by suggesting certain crimes aren't crimes? Please continue...
"That would be a nightmare scenario for Democrats, for three reasons."
Oh, only three? I'm surprised...
"Their base would demand that the new Democratic House majority impeach Trump, even if the charges have nothing to do with Russia. The 'resistance' does not care about Russia; it cares about getting rid of Trump, and any pretext will do. The pressure from the grass roots to impeach the president would be hard, if not impossible, for the new Democratic majority in the House to resist."
Really? No one cares about the undermining of our democracy (republic)? Would you use this same kind of logic for historical dictators? "Anti-Hitlerites don't really care about all the Jews he's had killed. They just want him removed from office." Yeah, that rationale would go over well. Next...
"Such an effort to remove Trump from office would fail. Even if House Democrats managed to pass articles of impeachment, there is zero chance that two-thirds of the Senate would vote to convict Trump for paying hush money to an adult-film star and a Playboy Playmate or for pre-presidential financial improprieties. And Americans- who rightly thought the purpose of the Mueller probe was to find out if Trump committed treason by working with Russia to steal the election - would see Democrats pointlessly trying to remove the president over completely unrelated allegations."
So if Bill Cosby had been elected president and was investigated for lying under oath, discovering he potentially committed multiple rapes would be irrelevant as to whether or not he should be in the White House? "So what if he raped hundreds of women? He didn't lie under oath and that's all there is to it. All heil to a rapist in the White House!"
"Such a failed impeachment effort would backfire on Democrats just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton backfired on Republicans in the 1990s. At the same point in his presidency, after Republicans won the House in 1994, Clinton's approval was stuck in the low 40s - only a few points better than Trump today. But two years later, after House Republicans approved articles of impeachment, Clinton's approval rating soared to 73 percent."
For the first time in his article, I partially agree with Thiessen. Like with Clinton, it is possible the American people would sour on Democratic opposition to him if they moved forward with the articles of impeachment. In saying that, however, these are starkly different situations. Bill Clinton lied about getting a blowjob from an intern. Donald Trump may very well be a crook, a fraud, and need to spend time in jail for his dastardly deeds. Bill Clinton is also a likable person, an eloquent speaker. Donald Trump is a jackass who speaks at a 3rd-grade level. While it's possible Trump could see a bump in the polls if Democrats obsess with impeaching him, it's also more possible this time around that voters will be thankful they are doing so.
"Despite incontrovertible evidence that Clinton had sexual relations with a White House intern and lied about it under oath, Clinton left office with the highest Gallup approval rating of any president since Harry Truman. If Democrats want to give Trump's approval a similar boost, there is no better way to do it than to impeach him for something unrelated to a criminal conspiracy with Russia."
Yes, because infidelity to one's wife is the same thing as infidelity to the law and one's country...
"Impeachment would not only raise Trump's approval with the very suburban voters Democrats just peeled away from the Republican Party in the midterms, but it would also energize his base as never before."
It would likely energize his already energized base, but just how much more energizing do they need? Also, why did suburban voters switch to the Democratic Party in the midterms? Because Trump is an embarrassment and likely a criminal. If Mueller proves he is in fact a criminal, nothing would have changed from that equation, so why then would these same suburban voters switch back to Trump? "Oh, he's still such an embarrassment and was proven to be a criminal, but still, Democrats are too focused on making this criminal pay for his crimes, so let's vote for the criminal." Makes sense...
"Trump's supporters knew about his affairs and shady business dealings in 2016. They knew about the 'Access Hollywood' tape, where he bragged about grabbing women by their private parts. They knew he boasted about ogling Miss Universe contestants as they were getting dressed and publicly fat-shamed a winner for gaining weight."
Actually, they might not have. They aren't the most aware or educated bunch in the world. Just sayin'...
"They knew about the evidence that students were ripped off by the for-profit Trump University (which was not actually a university). They knew that he had been credibly accused of using his charity, the Trump Foundation, to self-deal, including using $258,000 from its coffers to settle legal disputes. They knew about the bankruptcy of his Atlantic City casinos and the allegations that he failed to pay workers and contractors."
Once again, you're giving them too much credit. Don't forget, when a negative headline, like the ones listed, makes the waves, Trump cries "Fake news!" and his fans start chanting.
"They knew all this - and voted for him anyway. Impeaching him over pre-presidential conduct unrelated to Russia would be received in Trump country as nothing short of an attempted coup. That could provoke massive backlash. Just as the Democrats' campaign to destroy Brett Kavanaugh cost them the chance to take back the Senate in 2018, a campaign to impeach Trump could very well cost them the chance to take back the presidency in 2020."
The Democrats flipped 40 seats in the House to take control of that chamber of Congress. They also fared better in the Senate than they probably should have. Republicans winning in the red states of North Dakota, Indiana, and Missouri is nothing to get too pumped up about. That'd be like Democrats throwing a 2-week party after winning in Vermont, Oregon, and Hawaii.
"In other words, Democrats hoping that the Mueller probe will be Trump's undoing could find it is their own undoing instead."
I honestly have to wonder what kind of drugs Marc Thiessen was on when writing this piece. It is now documented that: Russia meddled in our election; had at least some success doing it; wanted Donald Trump to win; at least 33 individuals (some affiliated with Trump) have been indicted by the Special Counsel; a handful are, will be, or already have served jail-time; a majority of the American people think Trump has lied about Russia, trust Mueller more than Trump, and think the Mueller probe should continue to its rightful conclusion. Donald Trump asked Russia on national television for Hillary's "lost emails." This cannot be erased from record. Vladimir Putin has stated on national television that he wanted Donald Trump to win the election. Once again, we've got it on tape. Trump and his inner-circle's stories regarding Russia have changed more times than an infant's diapers after his mother ate late-night burritos from Taco Bell. Yet again, we have documented proof of these alterations in storytelling. No matter what terminology you want to use, Russia undermined our democracy and Trump was, at the very least, fully on-board with it in order to "win." Not only that, but there's increasing evidence that Donald Trump and his family have been committing financial crimes for years, perhaps decades. These are federal crimes. It's beyond asinine to compare them to a man getting a blowjob from an intern that wasn't his wife. Are both acts immoral? Yes, but that's where the similarities end, and no amount of wishful thinking is going to change that - even by you, Marc A. Thiessen.
https://www.pressherald.com/2018/12/21/marc-a-thiessen-mueller-probe-could-turn-out-to-be-a-disaster-for-the-democrats/
Thiessen starts his column with this:
"All of Washington is focused on the political peril President Trump faces from Robert Mueller's investigation. But the Mueller probe could very well turn out to be a disaster, not for Trump, but for the Democrats."
...and that's where we begin. Okay, Mr. Thiessen, let's hear your attempt at hypothetical rationalization, as if there were such a thing...
"The Special counsel was appointed to investigate whether Trump engaged in criminal conspiracy with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election. If Mueller finds incontrovertible evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, then the president will be - and should be - removed from office. But it is also possible that Mueller will not find evidence that Trump conspired with Russia, and that Mueller or federal prosecutors in New York's Southern District will find evidence for some other charge unrelated to a conspiracy with Russia - such as Trump's hush-money payments to alleged former mistresses or crimes related to Trump's family business."
Are you going the Rudy Giuliani "truth-isn't-truth" route by suggesting certain crimes aren't crimes? Please continue...
"That would be a nightmare scenario for Democrats, for three reasons."
Oh, only three? I'm surprised...
"Their base would demand that the new Democratic House majority impeach Trump, even if the charges have nothing to do with Russia. The 'resistance' does not care about Russia; it cares about getting rid of Trump, and any pretext will do. The pressure from the grass roots to impeach the president would be hard, if not impossible, for the new Democratic majority in the House to resist."
Really? No one cares about the undermining of our democracy (republic)? Would you use this same kind of logic for historical dictators? "Anti-Hitlerites don't really care about all the Jews he's had killed. They just want him removed from office." Yeah, that rationale would go over well. Next...
"Such an effort to remove Trump from office would fail. Even if House Democrats managed to pass articles of impeachment, there is zero chance that two-thirds of the Senate would vote to convict Trump for paying hush money to an adult-film star and a Playboy Playmate or for pre-presidential financial improprieties. And Americans- who rightly thought the purpose of the Mueller probe was to find out if Trump committed treason by working with Russia to steal the election - would see Democrats pointlessly trying to remove the president over completely unrelated allegations."
So if Bill Cosby had been elected president and was investigated for lying under oath, discovering he potentially committed multiple rapes would be irrelevant as to whether or not he should be in the White House? "So what if he raped hundreds of women? He didn't lie under oath and that's all there is to it. All heil to a rapist in the White House!"
"Such a failed impeachment effort would backfire on Democrats just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton backfired on Republicans in the 1990s. At the same point in his presidency, after Republicans won the House in 1994, Clinton's approval was stuck in the low 40s - only a few points better than Trump today. But two years later, after House Republicans approved articles of impeachment, Clinton's approval rating soared to 73 percent."
For the first time in his article, I partially agree with Thiessen. Like with Clinton, it is possible the American people would sour on Democratic opposition to him if they moved forward with the articles of impeachment. In saying that, however, these are starkly different situations. Bill Clinton lied about getting a blowjob from an intern. Donald Trump may very well be a crook, a fraud, and need to spend time in jail for his dastardly deeds. Bill Clinton is also a likable person, an eloquent speaker. Donald Trump is a jackass who speaks at a 3rd-grade level. While it's possible Trump could see a bump in the polls if Democrats obsess with impeaching him, it's also more possible this time around that voters will be thankful they are doing so.
"Despite incontrovertible evidence that Clinton had sexual relations with a White House intern and lied about it under oath, Clinton left office with the highest Gallup approval rating of any president since Harry Truman. If Democrats want to give Trump's approval a similar boost, there is no better way to do it than to impeach him for something unrelated to a criminal conspiracy with Russia."
Yes, because infidelity to one's wife is the same thing as infidelity to the law and one's country...
"Impeachment would not only raise Trump's approval with the very suburban voters Democrats just peeled away from the Republican Party in the midterms, but it would also energize his base as never before."
It would likely energize his already energized base, but just how much more energizing do they need? Also, why did suburban voters switch to the Democratic Party in the midterms? Because Trump is an embarrassment and likely a criminal. If Mueller proves he is in fact a criminal, nothing would have changed from that equation, so why then would these same suburban voters switch back to Trump? "Oh, he's still such an embarrassment and was proven to be a criminal, but still, Democrats are too focused on making this criminal pay for his crimes, so let's vote for the criminal." Makes sense...
"Trump's supporters knew about his affairs and shady business dealings in 2016. They knew about the 'Access Hollywood' tape, where he bragged about grabbing women by their private parts. They knew he boasted about ogling Miss Universe contestants as they were getting dressed and publicly fat-shamed a winner for gaining weight."
Actually, they might not have. They aren't the most aware or educated bunch in the world. Just sayin'...
"They knew about the evidence that students were ripped off by the for-profit Trump University (which was not actually a university). They knew that he had been credibly accused of using his charity, the Trump Foundation, to self-deal, including using $258,000 from its coffers to settle legal disputes. They knew about the bankruptcy of his Atlantic City casinos and the allegations that he failed to pay workers and contractors."
Once again, you're giving them too much credit. Don't forget, when a negative headline, like the ones listed, makes the waves, Trump cries "Fake news!" and his fans start chanting.
"They knew all this - and voted for him anyway. Impeaching him over pre-presidential conduct unrelated to Russia would be received in Trump country as nothing short of an attempted coup. That could provoke massive backlash. Just as the Democrats' campaign to destroy Brett Kavanaugh cost them the chance to take back the Senate in 2018, a campaign to impeach Trump could very well cost them the chance to take back the presidency in 2020."
The Democrats flipped 40 seats in the House to take control of that chamber of Congress. They also fared better in the Senate than they probably should have. Republicans winning in the red states of North Dakota, Indiana, and Missouri is nothing to get too pumped up about. That'd be like Democrats throwing a 2-week party after winning in Vermont, Oregon, and Hawaii.
"In other words, Democrats hoping that the Mueller probe will be Trump's undoing could find it is their own undoing instead."
I honestly have to wonder what kind of drugs Marc Thiessen was on when writing this piece. It is now documented that: Russia meddled in our election; had at least some success doing it; wanted Donald Trump to win; at least 33 individuals (some affiliated with Trump) have been indicted by the Special Counsel; a handful are, will be, or already have served jail-time; a majority of the American people think Trump has lied about Russia, trust Mueller more than Trump, and think the Mueller probe should continue to its rightful conclusion. Donald Trump asked Russia on national television for Hillary's "lost emails." This cannot be erased from record. Vladimir Putin has stated on national television that he wanted Donald Trump to win the election. Once again, we've got it on tape. Trump and his inner-circle's stories regarding Russia have changed more times than an infant's diapers after his mother ate late-night burritos from Taco Bell. Yet again, we have documented proof of these alterations in storytelling. No matter what terminology you want to use, Russia undermined our democracy and Trump was, at the very least, fully on-board with it in order to "win." Not only that, but there's increasing evidence that Donald Trump and his family have been committing financial crimes for years, perhaps decades. These are federal crimes. It's beyond asinine to compare them to a man getting a blowjob from an intern that wasn't his wife. Are both acts immoral? Yes, but that's where the similarities end, and no amount of wishful thinking is going to change that - even by you, Marc A. Thiessen.
https://www.pressherald.com/2018/12/21/marc-a-thiessen-mueller-probe-could-turn-out-to-be-a-disaster-for-the-democrats/
Comments
Post a Comment