[ad_1]
The impeachment debate is growing, both deafening and discouraging.
On the one hand, liberal politicians and experts argue that Democrats have an absolute duty to act against Donald Trump because he has flagrantly broken the law – not to mention the lack of accusations of Bob Mueller – and is so awful that history requires action, regardless of the political disadvantages.
Other leftist politicians and experts believe the impeachment would be futile and self-defeating, divide the country, destroy the Democrats' agenda – and eventually fail in the Senate.
This was set up in the chamber of the media echo for days, repeating the same arguments over and over again. Honestly, it's pretty boring.
NEW EDITION OF NEW SESSION JOURNALS TO INCREASE MUELLER REPORT, STUDY SAID
And there is also a surreal element. It is highly likely that the indictment will not occur (as long as Nancy Pelosi acts as the hammer guard), or that it will become an empty exercise (since 20 GOP senators will have to vote to empty Trump).
But now comes a different point of view, from one of Trump's less favorite newspapers.
Fred Hiatt, a long-time editor of the Washington Post editorial, is actually speaking out against dismissal. This is surprising at first glance, as the editorials of Post, and Hiatt himself, have been harshly criticizing Trump for years.
Indeed, when Trump was appointed in 2016, the editorial board wrote that he was "particularly poorly qualified to serve as president, and a Trump presidency would be dangerous for the nation and the world."
And, said Hiatt, they were right. But here is the twist:
SIGN UP FOR THE PODCAST BUZZMETER MEDIA MEDIA, A RIFF OF THE MOST HISTORIC DAYS
"We thought his disability was obvious before he was elected, and the Americans chose him anyway …
"The dismissal now of what the electorate has welcomed or has wanted to neglect is not the democratic answer.The correct answer is to defeat it by 2020."
Just in case someone would think that they were going smoothly on Trump.
Hiatt's argument, based on the platform owned by Jeff Bezos, is all the more convincing as the document was so critical of Trump.
The demolition dam breaks up as members of the PELOSI group give the tone of the hand: "we have already begun"
Many of Trump's traits – rampaging style, mixed trade balance, anti-immigrant attacks, the manic past, slam against false information – were widely exposed during the campaign. People did not think of having a choir boy or even a fine political practitioner. They wanted a disruptor.
According to Hiatt, "the outlines were known before the elections," as Trump praising WikiLeaks for publishing the hacked emails of the Democratic Party.
On the Mueller report and the alleged obstruction of justice, "Mueller did not find any underlying crime that would explain an attempt to obstruct, and Trump did not stop Mueller from ever". 39 to complete his work … Are we going to remove a president for want to clog? "
Of course, Mr. Hiatt said that Congress should continue to investigate and see where that would lead, but should seriously stop "before dismissing Trump for the serious crime of being what we knew was wrong. He was before electing him. "
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Now, I'm sure this article was not popular among Post readers who want the president to be kicked out of the public square today. The majority of the right will not be adopted either, as Trump does great work and there is no reason to dismiss him on the merits.
But for people who are open-minded, there are strong reasons not to use the Constitution as a last resort to cancel an election, especially in the lead-up to another election that could make a difference. verdict to the outgoing president.
[ad_2]
Source link