1hundredsixty8

The shit just got real: Even though the Republican-controlled Senate is not going to vote to remove Trump from office, his legacy will be that he was only one of three of the forty-five men who’ve held the office to be impeached by the House and face a trial. He is the only one of the three who brought this dishonor upon himself in his first term. He may stomp on the floor and hold his breath all he wants, but this remains an immutable fact.

Does Mitch McConnell ever feel shame? The Senate Majority Leader is the avatar of political cynicism. The man who blocked Obama nominee Merrick Garland from confirmation as a Supreme Court Justice is at it again. He stated he would conduct the Senate’s trial of Trump’s impeachment in lockstep with the White House. He proposed rules for the “trial” which would limit the time the House impeachment managers have to present their case and would exclude testimony from witnesses. As the trial opened, he batted away Democratic requests for witnesses and documents by forcing through tabling motions on party-line votes. We can expect Trump to crow about his “exoneration” when the Senate does not vote to remove him from office. The reality is that a solemn Constitution procedure has been reduced to an organized crime boss “owning the judge” at his trial.

When Donald Trump was elected President, the smart money told us that he, a reality-tv personality with no political experience and a problematic business history, would grow into the job. They were wrong: He did not grow into the job, but instead, three years into his term, has managed to shrink the job to fit the smallness of his world view and the pettiness of his persona.

When it comes to politics, irony and hypocrisy are close companions. Beginning with his campaign, Trump has consistently disparaged the US intelligence community as unreliable and accused what he terms “the Deep State” of actively working against him. He never publicly accepted the IC’s conclusions that the Russian state used cyberwarfare tactics to aid in his election. He reportedly shows little or no interest in the IC’s daily summary (the Presidential Daily Brief or PDB). So, it is surprising that he claims he based his order to assassinate Iranian general Qasem Suleimani on… wait for it… intelligence reports that Suleimani was planning “imminent” attacks. And while I’m on the subject, how ironic that Senator Lindsay Graham, who, during the leadup to Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial, spoke out about the necessity of having witnesses testify and evidence presented to the Senate, now feels that Donald Trump should not have to face such inconveniences. 

And may I add duplicity and prevarication? While politicians have a reputation for fantastical recitations, Trump’s torrent of falsehoods is beyond even the low expectations we have for public officials. There seems to be nothing that he will not lie about, from major issues of national import to piddling matters of no political significance. The sheer number of his exaggerations, false claims, and outright liess are stunning. More insidious, his drum beat of deceptions and dishonesty has infected many around him: White House staff, Senators and Representatives, Fox News sycophants, repeat and amplify Trump’s distortions of reality.

Do Democrats not understand the analogy of “putting the cart before the horse”?  It should be obvious that policy pronouncements by Presidential candidates are little more than wish lists: the reality is a President may propose legislation, but bills must be steered through the two Houses where they will be buffeted by the waves of lobbyists, special interests, and the parochial concerns of the legislators themselves. Candidates for office must understand the fundamental difference between electoral politics and governing politics. The difference may be distilled to branding and marketing on one side, and wonkishly-detailed policy prescriptions on the other. If Democrats are committed to winning back the White House and the Senate, they should begin with bold, clear messaging and cast their policy proposals as aspirations.

In the nation’s history, transcendental leaders have emerged at times of great crisis. Consider Washington as the first President, Lincoln during the Civil War, FDR during the Great Depression and World War II. If one agrees that we are at a pivotal point in the life of the Republic, then it seems imperative that now is the time for such a leader to come forward.