Rachel nailed it again. But the subject was familiar.

4
317

No, this is not a victory lap. Well OK, maybe just a little bitty one. But it isn’t every day that your opinion is validated by Rachel Maddow. Back on the 7th, I devoted an article to the badly misguided wisdom of even thinking about trying to impeach Mike Pence along with Emperor Numbus Nuttus, for fear that the GOP would not only revolt at the thought of making Nancy Pelosi President via the line of succession, but would tar the Democrats for trying to overturn the election of Trump.

So you can well imagine my surprise last night, when Rachel had former US Attorney Barbara McQuaid on for a segment discussing exactly the same thing that I had written about on the day before. And while Rachel and Barb’s discussion took a slightly different road than mine, they both ended up in the same parking lot.

Rachel’s argument was based on information that I did not have available when I wrote the original article. Mainly, an argument made by DOJ lawyers in federal court, defending Trump from investigation while President. In the argument, the DOJ lawyers gleefully threw Pence under the bus, saying that certainly a vice president could be impeached and removed from office, and nobody would even notice, since he didn’t actually do anything anyway. But a President on the other hand, especially an Imperial one? Not only did that argument crash to earth like a lead albatross, but for the second time in two days, a federal judge stated that the DOJ’s own memo prohibiting a sitting President from being indicted may be fatally flawed constitutionally. Ouch!

Based on that argument, Rachel’s contention was that with that argument in court, His Lowness was proactively setting Pence up to take the fall. Rachel opined that Trump may be thinking that the impeachment investigations of himself and Pence may proceed on a parallel track, with both of them facing articles of impeachment in the Senate at the same time. In that case, Rachel’s logic was that the GOP Senate would be more than happy to throw Pence off of the island as a sacrificial lamb, while retaining Trump with avoiding a Pelosi presidency as their excuse for their perfidy.

My operating scenario was that the House would go after Trump first, since his blood sacrifice was what the base demanded, and then turn to Pence once The Cheeto Prophet was out of the way. But actually, Rachel’s scenario is even more terrifying from a practical standpoint. If the Democrats in the House were to move against both Trump and Pence simultaneously, then the only impression possible would be that the Democrats were in fact moving to use constitutional means in a purely partisan manner to overturn the results of the 2016 election. And that way lies madness, as well as electoral ruin.

When I wrote that article, my biggest fear was that everybody would think that I was just doing an old Yeller, and licking my nuts again. So it was nice to see anybody have the same take on the situation as I did, much less the great Rachel Maddow. But the warning is the same either way. Making any kind of impeachment move on Mike Pence only makes Trump’s hand stronger, and only increases the peril for the Democrats in 2020. As I said at the time, just a word to the wise.

To know the future, look to the past. before the insanity of the 2020 election, relive the insanity of the 2016 GOP primary campaign, and the general election, to see how we got to where we are. Copies of  President Evil, and the sequel, President Evil II, A Clodwork Orange  are available as e-books on Amazon, at the links above. Catch up before the upcoming release of the third book in the trilogy, President Evil III: All The Presidents Fen

Liked it? Take a second to support Joseph "Murfster35" Murphy and PolitiZoom on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

4 Comments on "Rachel nailed it again. But the subject was familiar."

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
P J Evans
Guest

It was much easier with Agnew, as he had actually committed a crime before becoming VP.