Impeachment

I continue to chuckle at how many journalists and commentators get it wrong.  No, not "four" Presidents have had impeachment proceedings brought against them.  It's been five.  But who's counting?  Certainly not people who expect us to think they "get it right" regardless if they don't.  By the way, three Presidents have been impeached.  All three were not removed.

With all of the garbage being tossed at us from all sides, I'm not sure what Donald Trump did or didn't do.  In light of what recent Presidents have done, I am convinced, if they weren't impeached, then the charges against Trump are ridiculous.

Toss in the fact that Democrats were talking "impeachment" before Trump was even inaugurated and things become clearer as to intent.  Nancy Pelosi said that "...American voters should choose the President."  So why is it she thinks that Congress, the House in impeaching and the Senate in convicting, should determine who the President is?  More, she thinks the Democrats in Congress are the ones who should "choose the President."  Her and their actions speak far louder than her and their words.

I'm still confused by the charges, "abuse of power" and "obstruction of Congress."  "Abuse of power?"  Where were the Democrats when Obama used the IRS and other federal executive agencies to attack political opponents such as Tea Party and other conservative groups?  (I wonder if many know some progressive organizations, "enemies?," were also targets.)  Remember the name "Lois Lerner?"  Heh Heh.  "Obstruction of Congress?"  Obama's Attorney-General Eric Holder was held in "contempt of Congress."  Hmmm.  Doesn't that suggest "obstruction of Congress," at the very least?  And, for that matter, what is "obstruction of Congress?"  Isn't there a natural tendency for the Executive and Legislative branches to be at odds at least some of the time?  Don't we call that "Separation of Powers" and "Czechs and Norwegians?"  I know, I know.  "But that's different."

I laughed at the headline in one recent newspaper.  "GOP sends message Trump's actions were OK."  Here we go, another indictment of journalists, at least this one.  First, that's not what a not guilty verdict will say.  It says that Trump may or may not have committed these "actions," but they are not cause for removal.  So, in keeping silent about Obama's many "sins," voting pretty much as a party not to remove Bill Clinton (who actually did commit crimes!), etc., were the Democrats sending a message that Obama's and Clinton's actions were OK?

More, something this journalist must not have considered.  A number of members of the House of Representatives have lied, blatantly so, and behaved, quite frankly, with open bias and bigotry.  Some have displayed immoral and unethical behavior--on more than the impeachment circus.  Where are the Democrats in the House in, again at the very least, bringing censure proceedings against their fellow party members?  Yep, their silence is deafening and would reasonably lead Americans to think "Democrats send message that their House members' actions were OK."

I have written more than once to my elected members of Congress about this.  I have asked them to show honesty, courage, and integrity, rather than blind party loyalty.  I have asked them why they haven't introduced censure proceedings against their fellow Democrats.  Either I receive no responses or some innocuous blather not much related to the issue.

I once heard a wise man say, "If you accept it, you condone it."  Again, I know, I know.  "But that's different."