Damn It, Here We Go: Graham Says Senate Can Ignore Impeachment IF …

14
351

Okay, in the time between the Democrats’ announcement of the complaint and right now as I sit here, I have never been as angry, offended and depressed about anything having to do with Trump and the impeachment inquiry. On the other hand, many of you have already predicted that we’d end up at this exact spot. Still, it is the rationalization that I find infuriating.

Before I lay this out, let me note this. Under the wording of the constitution, the House could impeach the president on a charge of bouncing a $4 check, accidentally written off a wrongly closed account. The Senate “shall” hear the evidence on impeachment and convict, or not. Obviously, above, the Senate would just vote 99-1 to not convict and rip the House. (Assume no parties.)

Okay, now Graham’s “theory.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) argued that he will consider any impeachment “invalid” unless it exposes the identity of the whistleblower who outed President Donald Trump’s alleged extortion of Ukraine.

Are you freaking kidding me? The Republicans get to consider whether they like the impeachment or not before it even gets there?

Does anyone not see that this invalidates the entire impeachment process if the Senate is controlled by the opposite party?

“I consider any impeachment in the House that doesn’t allow us to know who the whistleblower is to be invalid,” the South Carolina senator declared. “Because without the whistleblower complaint, we wouldn’t be talking about any of this.”

No, Lindsey, that is 100% wrong, and you know it. If the whistleblower was the sole witness to the action charged, then you might have a point, and it would be a basis to find the president “not guilty.” But, the whistleblower “blew the whistle” and then witnesses came forward to settle without a doubt that there is a big problem here. The whistleblower couldn’t be less relevant at this point because far more evidence backs up that even more occurred than one phone call and the concerns pre-dated the phone call.

I am furious, and not just because this is typical Republican bullshit. I am furious because whistleblower statutes are designed specifically to protect the whistleblower and allow him to remain anonymous.

I am furious because Republicans want the man exposed so they can blast the shit out of his credibility (which couldn’t matter less now because we have more solid evidence).

But I am most furious because Republicans know that exposing the person will lead to all kinds of abuse heaped upon the man, including death threats and possibly an attack itself.  Such abuse intimidates any other witness who might come forward, even a Republican witness who doesn’t want to testify but thinks he must truthfully tell the story.

And not a single person watching doesn’t know it.

It is one thing to have the impeachment and declare Trump innocent on an invalid charge, or more properly, insufficient evidence (as to the WB identity) and quite another to refuse to even hear it because they’ve already decided it isn’t valid in their eyes.

If this can be done, all future majority parties will find a reason to declare an impeachment “invalid” and dismiss the entire thing prior to hearing the evidence. Hugh Hewitt this morning said McConnell should just throw it out because “It is purely political.” In other words, the Republicans don’t care about the underlying reason, they’re going to declare it all invalid.

I guess that shouldn’t surprise me, Republicans have sought to invalidate many inconvenient aspects of the constitution, especially those reliant upon the Senate doing the right thing.

****

Peace, y’all

Jason

jmiciak@yahoo.com and on Twitter @MiciakZoom

Liked it? Take a second to support Jason Miciak and PolitiZoom on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

14 Comments on "Damn It, Here We Go: Graham Says Senate Can Ignore Impeachment IF …"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
mae
Member

He needs to be investigated.

p j evans
Member

He needs his legal credentials revoked, all the way back to 2016.
He should know better. really.

p j evans
Member

Hewitt and McConnell need to unwedge their heads. Impeachment is always political. They’re still in the investigation (“grand jury”) phase, anyway, and the Senate is responsible only for the trial. (You’d think Graham would have a f*cking clue: he was a floor manager during the entirely-political Clinton impeachment.)

Darrel
Member
I think he probably DOES have a clue, and the fright level for these GOP freaks is SO high now, because every click they hear now, people by name and photos on record are finding their way to a public podium, where they don’t want to let them speak, but things are flowing out of their greasy hands now, they barked SO LOUD about Schiff behind those doors before, just to knee-clip the Democrats, not thinking ahead to the massive exposure of their own criminal doings could pop up at any moment, AND the complicit Republicans might as well consider… Read more »
Joseph
Guest

Especially when the Clinton impeachment rested ENTIRELY on ILLEGALLY recorded phone conversations between Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp. (There were underlying issues but WITHOUT those illegal recordings, the impeachment proceedings would’ve had to go in another direction, especially as Starr’s ORIGINAL mandate was ONLY to cover “improprieties” in the Whitewater deal.)

rory darjiit
Member

Eye on the prize. We never had much of a chance at removal. Bring his wrongdoing to the light of day, show the electorate that the GOP is complicit, beat them all in 2020, then hold Trump accountable under the law for everything we can.

And remember that any red state senators we run out of office will be gone for 6 years. The Supreme Court justices are all pretty old.

p j evans
Member

Gorsuch isn’t old. Neither is Roberts. And Kavanaugh is young.

Joseph
Guest

Um, about those senators, not necessarily. They could come back in as little as 2 years, depending on the state. Look at Jeff Sessions, for instance. He’s decided to run for the seat he vacated so he could be Trump’s AG.

And, on a highly frustrating point, Roy Moore has announced he’s planning to run for the seat again as well.

michaelscott
Member

Jason, you are 100% correct. They know that the identity of the WB is irrelevant.
The sole purpose for identifying him/her is to intimidate others thinking of doing the same.
Lindsey Graham is the ultimate beta male and since McCain passed, has been looking for a new “daddy”, but this is extreme, even for him. What oh what do the Russians have on you Miss Lindsey?

chris whitley
Member
Well one thing is clear. They have something to loose. I believe Putin has the goods on several of these morons. The other thing is. The republicans used to be the law and order party. Trump not only committed an impeachment offense, he also broke the law doing it. Last time I checked extortion was illegal. And they are worried that some of their members might revolt on their impeachment vote. Even if they don’t convict it will still leave a stain if ten or so republicans vote to impeach. Remember that it’s already been said if it was an… Read more »
chris whitley
Member

Well in all fairness if they want Hunter Biden we should call Ivanka and Jared Kushner. Their time in the White House reeks of corruption. Between secret loans to Jared’s family business totally close to a billion dollars and that Ivanka has somewhere in the neighborhood of twenty patents with China and Japan. Then you have Ivanka setting up a enterprise zone that just happens to have a substantial amount of Jared Kushner property in it. Hey republicans want to look at corruption let’s look at corruption.