QOTD -- The Politics Of Impeachment

 

"...[T]he former president depends on congressional Republicans. He always has, and I think this impeachment inquiry is being demanded, being sought, in part to muddy the waters, to make the accusations through Congress, through impeachment about President Biden. And so I think there is a lot of pressure on Speaker Johnson. But frankly, I think Speaker Johnson is happy to go along. He is part of the cohort that has been very eager to get this going...

"...But, look, this still is very much more like the 1990s, right, than the last impeachment we went through. That was when Republicans went to impeach a former President Clinton, in the Monica Lewinsky story. Here, though, we don't even know what the accusations are. There's no evidence of anything at this point. And this is quite a contrast with Speaker Pelosi, in 2019, really didn't want to move forward with impeachment. Here they are moving forward fast without anything there. So that tells you the politics of the impeachment is much more important now than the actual substance behind what they are pursuing..." (our emphasis) -- Princeton professor Julian Zelizer, on CNN this morning, accurately describing the on-going coup being planned by Christofascists in the House, led by January 6 coup plotter Speaker Mike Johnson.  It's not clear that Johnson has the votes at this time to actually pass an impeachment resolution, should it emerge from the fever swamps of a Republican- controlled committee. But, the point is as Zelizer notes -- to muddy the waters for easily manipulated, credulous voters and media.  There is evidence, though, that many voters will see right through the gambit as retaliation for the Malignant Loser's deserved two impeachments.  They'll hopefully be reminded of the chaos, extremism, and incompetence of Republicans in the House not doing the people's business while they engage in transparent revenge politics.  Zelizer's comparison to the Clinton impeachment, and how that likely caused Republicans to lose seats in the House in the 1998 off- year election when they should have picked some up, should (but won't) be a caution to Johnson, et al.