Did Impeachment Just Fizzle?

David Thornton

David Thornton is a freelance writer and professional pilot who has also lived in Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. He is a graduate of the University of Georgia and Emmanuel College. He is Christian conservative/libertarian who was fortunate enough to have seen Ronald Reagan in person during his formative years. A former contributor to The Resurgent, David now writes for the Racket News with fellow Resurgent alum, Steve Berman, and his personal blog, CaptainKudzu. He currently lives with his wife and daughter near Columbus, Georgia. His son is serving in the US Air Force. You can find him on Twitter @CaptainKudzu and Facebook.

Related Post Roulette

14 Responses

  1. Philip H says:

    Once again:
    They.
    Do.
    Not.
    Care.

    The GOP is using the threat of impeachment to wear down ordinary Americans, so we won’t push back on their increasing fascistic leanings. They are flooding the zone with Sh!t so people will loose the ability to determine fact from fiction. They are leading with raw negative emotions – as they have for over four decades – to drive people into rage filled reactions instead of reason filled analysis.

    In so doing they can cement power – or so they think.Report

  2. Dark Matter says:

    I see no evidence that Joe is more corrupt than normal, or that his family is benefiting from their relationship more than normal.

    It was probably worthwhile to do the investigation, certainly from a risk-reward political stance, but it was a dry well.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter says:

      Right – its not like Biden made his son a formal White House Advisor or anything.Report

      • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H says:

        If he were a formal WH advisor and done the sorts of things he did, i.e. sold access or the illusion of access, then we might be into illegal territory. Now “illegal for whom” gets interesting.Report

        • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter says:

          Please see Kushner, Jared for another example.Report

          • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H says:

            The Billionaire? His gov job paid less than his original job.

            If you are going to claim it was corrupt then you need to be a lot more specific.

            It wasn’t the equiv of HRC’s daughter being hired as an “artist” by NBC for $600k a year. Nor Hunter being hired as an oil expert for $600k a year with no oil expertise and not speaking the language.

            Trump did corrupt things, to the best of my knowledge Jared isn’t alleged to be involved in them.Report

            • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter says:

              What I’m claiming is that if it’s acceptable for Jared Kushner to be named an actual White House aid, while raking in millions because he had actual access to the oval office in an official capacity, then its acceptable for Hunter Biden to call his dad to create the illusion of access even though he apparently never employed that access. We have talked often around here – at your insistence I might add – that “corruption” has both legal and moral/ethical dimensions, and that something can be legal but still unethical. Thus corrupt.Report

              • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H says:

                Define “raking in millions because he had actual access to the oval office in an official capacity”. If you’re going to claim he was doing insider trading you need to get real specific.

                JFK’s brother was appointed US AG. He got the job from a personal relationship with the President but he actually did the job for which he was hired. Far as I can tell, Jared did the same thing but he was given a lot less power (thus avoiding the 1967 Federal Anti-Nepotism statute).

                If you want to call the President hiring a relative for any job that they can legitimately do corrupt then you can… but you don’t seem willing to do that because you keep larding it up with vague “raking in millions” claims.

                RE: Hunter
                Hunter is/was doing things we have outlawed for the children of foreign politicians. The name of the law is the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

                My expectation is if we decide to outlaw various corrupt practices, then what Hunter did will be outlawed as a problem while what Jared did will not.Report

              • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H says:

                Well, it looks like lots of smoke, which might indicate fire. The counter point is Jared set this up after he (and Trump) left office.

                My strong expectation is Hunter’s amazing ability to get hired to do very little disappears the moment his dad leaves office. Like how HRC’s charity’s international arm folded the moment she lost the election.Report

    • Ny9k in reply to Dark Matter says:

      “More Corrupt than Normal.”

      Right. And we just wasted how much time on a Presidential Impeachment to tell Don to “keep your paws off our corruption?” (Please bear in mind, SBF was a conduit to get money from the Ukraine to American Electioneering.)

      I’m reminded of the old bit about “Everything’s the same, except we’re all cats. In another universe.”Report

  3. Burt Likko says:

    This is a thought experiment. I’m not sure I completely buy this line of thought myself. But I do think there’s some value to playing the game, if only for a couple of minutes.

    After all, we think we have a pretty good idea of what a corrupt President would look like. A corrupted President would steer policy towards interests from which he would benefit, either immediately or in the future. He might use a family member as a proxy to collect this graft, but he’d for sure be doing things that we could plausibly translate into actual dollars flowing into his pocket. Debatably, we’d see connections between the President and past associates or donors or sponsors or allies and understand some future repayment after the President had left office.

    What would an actually, completely, totally honest and non-corrupt President look like? What behavior could you point to that would tell you the President was being straight up and straight arrow? Could you tell that the President was 100% non-corrupt from their policy decisions? Could you tell? Policy decisions cannot be neutral, after all; there will always be winners and losers.

    So I’m not saying that Joe Biden is uncorruptable (although like the OP I don’t see evidence that anything in Ukraine has corrupted him despite a lot of ballyhoo by Republicans anxious to find something, anything, for which they might impeach him). But maybe it would be hard to tell if he wasn’t.Report

    • Measure Twice in reply to Burt Likko says:

      SBF is a pretty good indication that Biden’s Administration was corrupted. He was chosen to launder campaign finance money through the Ukraine because he looks like a guy from Superbad.
      $40 million dollars to buy 2022 — to buy Fetterman (didn’t cost much) and a whole host of other people.

      What scares me is that Biden’s Administration is kinda… incompetent. (They’ve sunk a lot of propaganda time and capital towards besmirching Trump, and it hasn’t even gotten the moderate republicans). If Jill starts feeling like the impeachment is closing in on her family… well, it wouldn’t be out of the question for them to release a “causus belli” for another “mail-in” election.Report

  4. DensityDuck says:

    It’s amusing watching everything that people with half a brain (including Nancy Pelosi!) said about “impeachment” come true. It’s just a pointless statement now, a “vote of no confidence” so that the Opposing Party can make a formal declaration on the record that The President Is A Big Dumb-Head With A Big Stupid Face And We Don’t Like Them, Nyaaahh.Report