Eliza Relman BI
OF COURSE HE DID
HE ANNOUNCED IT AT MAR A LAGO TO IMPRESS
HIS TRUMPETTE CROWD OF PEROXIDE BLONDE
1%ERS AND HE WOULDN'T WANT TO BREAK A
PROMISE TO HIS REAL BASE
HE ANNOUNCED IT AT MAR A LAGO TO IMPRESS
HIS TRUMPETTE CROWD OF PEROXIDE BLONDE
1%ERS AND HE WOULDN'T WANT TO BREAK A
PROMISE TO HIS REAL BASE
WHO UNLIKE DON ARE NOT TEETOTALERS, SO
THEIR ENTHUSIASM FOR ASSASSINATION AND
WAR CRIMES WERE WELL LUBRICATED
THEIR ENTHUSIASM FOR ASSASSINATION AND
WAR CRIMES WERE WELL LUBRICATED
President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell, accompanied by Vice President
Mike Pence. Associated Press/Alex Brandon
President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who will play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressure from the senators.
One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.
Graham has criticized the president's foreign-policy choices in the past — most notably Trump's withdrawal of troops from northern Syria and his handling of Saudi Arabia.
Publicly, Trump has said he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq. The administration has not provided evidence to support this claim.
President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who'll play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressured to satisfy senators who were pushing for stronger US action against Soleimani and who will run defense for him on impeachment.
One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.
"I was briefed about the potential operation when I was down in Florida," Graham told Fox News. "I appreciate being brought into the orbit."
The South Carolina Republican, an Iran hawk, celebrated the controversial strike, which the administration did not seek congressional authorization to carry out. After Iran retaliated by hitting US-occupied Iraqi bases on Tuesday, Graham called the move "an act of war."
Graham has criticized the president's foreign-policy choices in the past — most notably Trump's withdrawal of troops from northern Syria and his handling of Saudi Arabia following the country's murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a US resident.
Trump said on Thursday that he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq.
But the administration hasn't released any evidence to support the claim that Iran was planning such an attack on the embassy, or any other imminent attack.
During an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the Trump administration didn't know "precisely when" or "precisely where" an attack would have targeted.
Democratic lawmakers — and a few Republicans — were infuriated by a classified briefing they received from the Trump administration on Wednesday concerning the US strike that killed Soleimani and a top Iraqi militant leader.
The lawmakers said they weren't provided any evidence of an imminent and specific threat posed by Soleimani — evidence of which is required to legally launch an attack without congressional authorization.
Republican Sen. Mike Lee called the briefing, which Pompeo helped lead, "probably the worst briefing, at least on a military issue, I've seen in nine years I've been here."
SEE ALSO: After Trump claimed Iran was plotting to blow up the US embassy in Iraq, Mike Pompeo says the administration didn't know 'precisely when' or 'where' the attack would happen
Associates: Trump Said Key GOP Senators for Impeachment Trial Pressured Him to Strike Soleimani
by Matt Naham | 10:43 am, January 10th, 20
You don’t have to scour the internet for very long to find people asking “Why kill Qassem Soleimani now?” and answering “To distract from impeachment, of course.” The “wag the dog” theory, though, just got a bit of a boost from an unlikely source in the Wall Street Journal.
Buried in a lengthy Thursday story on how the Trump administration ultimately decided to take out the Iranian general was a nugget saying that President Donald Trump told associates he was under pressure to placate GOP Senators who will be key players once his impeachment trial in the Senate begins.
Per the Journal:
The way the strike was handled has drawn scrutiny from Democrats and some Republicans. Critics say the decision was hasty, considering the risk of all-out war. They also question whether the intelligence that prompted the action was as clear-cut and alarming as the White House has said, and see the move as doing little to further U.S. interests in the region.
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.
A remarkable line that represents, to our knowledge, the first sourced claim that impeachment was, to some degree, on the president’s mind or a factor when he ordered the Soleimani strike.
IMPEACHAPALOOZA
Report: Trump Ordered Iran Strike Because of Impeachment Fears
Was there actually an “imminent” threat, or was it a political calculation?
Inae Oh
News and Engagement Editor Bio | Follow
Tasos Katopodis/Getty
To justify its drone strike against Qassem Soleimani, the White House claimed last week that the top Iranian military leader had been preparing “imminent” attacks against American diplomats in the region. That claim has since evolved, as various Trump administration officials struggled on multiple occasions to explain what exactly defines an “imminent” threat.
“We don’t know precisely when and we don’t know precisely where, but it was real,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Fox News on Thursday, remarks many interpreted as an admission that Soleimani did not actually pose a grave and immediate threat to American lives.
But while the White House continues to be all over the map on this, a new report appears to confirm a sneaking suspicion held by Trump critics for why Trump ordered the strike at this very point in his presidency. From the Wall Street Journal:
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate.
The New York Times reported something similar this week, stating that Trump had said in a phone call that “he had been pressured to take a harder line on Iran by some Republican senators whose support he needs now more than ever amid an impeachment battle.”
If this reporting is true, it’s hard to overstate how explosive it would be that the president of the United States nearly started a war in order to appease a handful of Republican senators before impeachment arrives in the Senate.
Assassination ‘was a Mar-a-Lago decision’: Here’s how generals could have blocked it if Trump had been in DC
Published on January 10, 2020
By Bob Brigham
The hostilities with Iran may have been averted if President Donald Trump had not been vacationing at his Mar-a-Lago resort, an expert on his Florida compound explained on MSNBC on Friday.
“Donald Trump goes down to Mar-a-Lago a lot — especially during the winter,” MSNBC anchor Katy Tur said. “As the owner, he’s always been vetted as a rock star there, but my next guest now it’s different, now he’s being treated to something more akin to a God.”
For analysis, Tur interviewed journalist Laurence Leamer, the author of the 2018 book Mar-A-Lago: Inside the Gates of Power at Donald Trump’s Presidential Palace
“So Larry, you say it’s taken on more of a cult-like atmosphere,” Tur said.
“It’s this atmosphere of endless stroking which I think is unhealthy for the leader of our country,” Leamer said.
“In fact, the assassination of General Suleimani in a way is a Mar-a-Lago decision. I’m not sure if he’s been in the Oval Office and his aides and generals had talked about the consequences of killing this evil man if he would have gone ahead. But that’s what Mar-a-Lago is for him and he needs it, he’s hungry for it.”
“It’s more like a cult the longer he’s there,” Leamer added.
The host also examined whether there might have been insider trading connected to Mar-a-Lago in the hours between when the strike was conducted and when the Pentagon claimed credit for the assassination.
The Wall Street Journal accidentally reveals the unbearable truth about Soleimani’s assassination
Published on January 10, 2020
By John Stoehr, The Editorial Board
- Commentar
The plain truth can often be so obvious as to be invisible. That’s my more charitable interpretation of the press corps’ coverage of Qassem Soleimani’s assassination. My less charitable interpretation? Reporters and editors in Washington, D.C., will find a way to avoid seeing the plain truth because the plain truth is too unbearable to see.
This article was originally published at The Editorial Board
It would be unbearable to think the president ordered a man dead in order to give Republican Senators a means of defending him against an indictment for abuse of power and obstruction. It would be unthinkable for him to bring America to the brink of war in order to create an image of a “war president” too indispensable to remove.
As a result, the press corps has been busy this week reporting in granular detail virtually every aspect of Donald Trump’s decision last week to target and kill Iran’s top general in Baghdad. Everything, that is, short of reporting the plain, obvious and unbearable truth: the president ordered a man’s death because he was impeached.
That reporters and editors in Washington, D.C, find ways to avoid seeing the plain truth was brought to mind by this morning’s Wall Street Journal. In a piece about the president’s new national security team—how its “cohesion” resulted in Soleimani’s assassination—seven esteemed reporters committed one of journalism’s professional sins. They buried the lede. Nearly 30 paragraphs into a 2,200-word story, they said:
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said (my italics).
Now, these are unnamed sources. They were speaking on background. In isolation, I wouldn’t make much of this. But in context, it matters—so much so, it warrants its own reporting, which we have not yet seen. That context would be the absence of legitimate non-political reasons for ordering Soleimani’s death. In all the reporting I’ve read, administration officials can’t keep their stories straight. On the one hand, that suggests no good reason. On the other, that suggests the most obvious one.
The buried lede suggests something else worth exploring. The president may not have been alone in seeking to please Republican senators who will sit in judgement of him during the impeachment trial. It may be that a Republican senator—Lindsey Graham comes to mind—encouraged the president to act on Soleimani. In that case, we would have to face yet another unbearable truth: some Republicans in the United States Senate are conspiring with the president in defrauding the people to maintain power.
Though unbearable, it’s plain and it’s obvious. The Republicans really are dumping constitutional principles once dearly and closely held for the sake of power. Graham and other Republicans declared their intent to violate preemptively the oath all impeachment jurors take to “do impartial justice, according to the Constitution and law.” Graham and Mitch McConnell, the current Senate majority leader, were highly principled during the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton. Now that the defendant is a Republican, however, those principles are beside the point. Both worked hard to ensure Trump a rapid acquittal without his having to work too hard for it.
What’s good for Clinton is not good for Trump—that’s not a matter of hypocrisy. I can’t stress that enough, because that’s another unbearable truth. There are two value systems, according to the Republican theory and practice. There is one set of laws, rules and norms for Republicans. There’s another set for Democrats. One protects. One punishes. The GOP benefits enormously when the press corps sees just one.
It seemed hypocritical when Rand Paul, a Republican senator, said yesterday he was ready to debate separations of powers after administration officials told him and GOP Senator Mike Lee not to talk about military intervention in Iran. Lee said “it was un-American. It’s unconstitutional. And it’s wrong.” Their Democratic colleagues might have thought they prepared to support the conviction of Trump for the same offense. Lee made it clear he wasn’t. He told Fox News Thursday the president is the best.
Again, this isn’t hypocrisy. According to Republican theory and practice, Republicans get to be principled. Democrats do not. Republicans have the right to respect and deference. Democrats do not. When the Republicans impeached a Democrat, they stood on high moral ground. When the Democrats impeached a Republican, according to Republicans, the Democrats did no such thing. The Republican got to call witnesses. Democrats do not. There are two value systems—separate and unequal.
That, to me, is not just a plain truth. It’s not just an unbearable truth. It’s a pernicious truth. The Republican Party can and will commit unthinkable acts to maintain power—like permitting foreign interference and encouraging acts of war, not to mention suppressing the vote and enshrining minority rule in constitutional and statutory law—even if those acts slowly eat away the foundations of our democratic covenant.
Now imagine the press corps reporting the obvious truth.
I think things would be different.
THIS SHOWS THAT AGAIN THE WHITE HOUSE IS LYING AND USING CYA REASONING TO DENY THAT AMERICA JUST ENGAGED IN AN ACT OF WAR AGAINST A SOVEREIGN NATION BY ASSASSINATING ONE OF IT'S STATE OFFICIALS IN VIOLATION OF THE HAGUE AGREEMENT THIS IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY AND A WAR CRIME WHICH IS WHY THE USA DENIES THE LEGITIMACY OF THE NUERNBERG COURT THE ICC BY ANY OTHER NAME.
MORE STORIES
Trump may have weighed impeachment before killing Iran’s Soleimani
The Wall Street Journal reports Trump weighed impeachment concerns when opting to kill Iran's Soleimani.
HillReporter.com
Trump Told Associates Soleimani Strike Was Needed To Curry GOP Senators' Favor For Impeachment Vote — Report
What influenced President Donald Trump to order the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani last week? Reports from a number of sources have ...
Trump ordered Soleimani attack to appease Republicans he views as important for impeachment, report says
Donald Trump ordered the airstrike that killed an Iranian general last week at least in part due to fears about his upcoming impeachment trial in the Senate, ...
AlterNet
Trump assassinated Soleimani to gain favor with key GOP senators vital to supporting him during impeachment trial: WSJ
It has long been said that President Trump only acts in his own self-interest, not the nation's. And while in recent days President Trump has described the Iranian ...
Mediaite
Trump Reportedly Says Impeachment Played Role in Striking Soleimani, Felt ‘Pressure to Deal With’ Him From GOP Sens
President Donald Trump had impeachment on his mind when he decided to order the strike that killed Iranian Quds Forces leader Qasem Soleimani according ...
MSNBC
Trump reportedly connected impeachment trial, Soleimani airstrike
Trump was impeached for putting political interests above national security interests. It'd be amazing if did the same thing during the impeachment process.
Trump privately admits he killed Soleimani “under pressure” from upcoming impeachment trial: report
Trump reportedly said that "he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators" key to his trial.
The American Independent
Trump said he launched Iran strike 'under pressure' from GOP impeachment jurors
A new report claims Trump was concerned about support from Senate Republicans ahead of his impeachment trial when he made the decision to take out the ...
President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who will play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressure from the senators.
One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.
Graham has criticized the president's foreign-policy choices in the past — most notably Trump's withdrawal of troops from northern Syria and his handling of Saudi Arabia.
Publicly, Trump has said he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq. The administration has not provided evidence to support this claim.
President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who'll play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressured to satisfy senators who were pushing for stronger US action against Soleimani and who will run defense for him on impeachment.
One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.
"I was briefed about the potential operation when I was down in Florida," Graham told Fox News. "I appreciate being brought into the orbit."
The South Carolina Republican, an Iran hawk, celebrated the controversial strike, which the administration did not seek congressional authorization to carry out. After Iran retaliated by hitting US-occupied Iraqi bases on Tuesday, Graham called the move "an act of war."
Graham has criticized the president's foreign-policy choices in the past — most notably Trump's withdrawal of troops from northern Syria and his handling of Saudi Arabia following the country's murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a US resident.
Trump said on Thursday that he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq.
But the administration hasn't released any evidence to support the claim that Iran was planning such an attack on the embassy, or any other imminent attack.
During an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the Trump administration didn't know "precisely when" or "precisely where" an attack would have targeted.
Democratic lawmakers — and a few Republicans — were infuriated by a classified briefing they received from the Trump administration on Wednesday concerning the US strike that killed Soleimani and a top Iraqi militant leader.
The lawmakers said they weren't provided any evidence of an imminent and specific threat posed by Soleimani — evidence of which is required to legally launch an attack without congressional authorization.
Republican Sen. Mike Lee called the briefing, which Pompeo helped lead, "probably the worst briefing, at least on a military issue, I've seen in nine years I've been here."
SEE ALSO: After Trump claimed Iran was plotting to blow up the US embassy in Iraq, Mike Pompeo says the administration didn't know 'precisely when' or 'where' the attack would happen
Associates: Trump Said Key GOP Senators for Impeachment Trial Pressured Him to Strike Soleimani
by Matt Naham | 10:43 am, January 10th, 20
You don’t have to scour the internet for very long to find people asking “Why kill Qassem Soleimani now?” and answering “To distract from impeachment, of course.” The “wag the dog” theory, though, just got a bit of a boost from an unlikely source in the Wall Street Journal.
Buried in a lengthy Thursday story on how the Trump administration ultimately decided to take out the Iranian general was a nugget saying that President Donald Trump told associates he was under pressure to placate GOP Senators who will be key players once his impeachment trial in the Senate begins.
Per the Journal:
The way the strike was handled has drawn scrutiny from Democrats and some Republicans. Critics say the decision was hasty, considering the risk of all-out war. They also question whether the intelligence that prompted the action was as clear-cut and alarming as the White House has said, and see the move as doing little to further U.S. interests in the region.
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.
A remarkable line that represents, to our knowledge, the first sourced claim that impeachment was, to some degree, on the president’s mind or a factor when he ordered the Soleimani strike.
Quite the nugget in this WSJ story —>Who might those “important supporters” be? We can assume that, whoever it is, they’re hawkish. This is purely speculative, but Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) seems to neatly fit into the category of important impeachment trial supporter/Soleimani strike advocate.
"Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said" https://t.co/3xxLFJ6XTk
— Dave Brown (@dave_brown24) January 10, 2020
IMPEACHAPALOOZA
Report: Trump Ordered Iran Strike Because of Impeachment Fears
Was there actually an “imminent” threat, or was it a political calculation?
Inae Oh
News and Engagement Editor Bio | Follow
Tasos Katopodis/Getty
To justify its drone strike against Qassem Soleimani, the White House claimed last week that the top Iranian military leader had been preparing “imminent” attacks against American diplomats in the region. That claim has since evolved, as various Trump administration officials struggled on multiple occasions to explain what exactly defines an “imminent” threat.
“We don’t know precisely when and we don’t know precisely where, but it was real,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Fox News on Thursday, remarks many interpreted as an admission that Soleimani did not actually pose a grave and immediate threat to American lives.
But while the White House continues to be all over the map on this, a new report appears to confirm a sneaking suspicion held by Trump critics for why Trump ordered the strike at this very point in his presidency. From the Wall Street Journal:
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate.
The New York Times reported something similar this week, stating that Trump had said in a phone call that “he had been pressured to take a harder line on Iran by some Republican senators whose support he needs now more than ever amid an impeachment battle.”
If this reporting is true, it’s hard to overstate how explosive it would be that the president of the United States nearly started a war in order to appease a handful of Republican senators before impeachment arrives in the Senate.
Assassination ‘was a Mar-a-Lago decision’: Here’s how generals could have blocked it if Trump had been in DC
Published on January 10, 2020
By Bob Brigham
The hostilities with Iran may have been averted if President Donald Trump had not been vacationing at his Mar-a-Lago resort, an expert on his Florida compound explained on MSNBC on Friday.
“Donald Trump goes down to Mar-a-Lago a lot — especially during the winter,” MSNBC anchor Katy Tur said. “As the owner, he’s always been vetted as a rock star there, but my next guest now it’s different, now he’s being treated to something more akin to a God.”
For analysis, Tur interviewed journalist Laurence Leamer, the author of the 2018 book Mar-A-Lago: Inside the Gates of Power at Donald Trump’s Presidential Palace
“So Larry, you say it’s taken on more of a cult-like atmosphere,” Tur said.
“It’s this atmosphere of endless stroking which I think is unhealthy for the leader of our country,” Leamer said.
“In fact, the assassination of General Suleimani in a way is a Mar-a-Lago decision. I’m not sure if he’s been in the Oval Office and his aides and generals had talked about the consequences of killing this evil man if he would have gone ahead. But that’s what Mar-a-Lago is for him and he needs it, he’s hungry for it.”
“It’s more like a cult the longer he’s there,” Leamer added.
The host also examined whether there might have been insider trading connected to Mar-a-Lago in the hours between when the strike was conducted and when the Pentagon claimed credit for the assassination.
The Wall Street Journal accidentally reveals the unbearable truth about Soleimani’s assassination
Published on January 10, 2020
By John Stoehr, The Editorial Board
- Commentar
The plain truth can often be so obvious as to be invisible. That’s my more charitable interpretation of the press corps’ coverage of Qassem Soleimani’s assassination. My less charitable interpretation? Reporters and editors in Washington, D.C., will find a way to avoid seeing the plain truth because the plain truth is too unbearable to see.
This article was originally published at The Editorial Board
It would be unbearable to think the president ordered a man dead in order to give Republican Senators a means of defending him against an indictment for abuse of power and obstruction. It would be unthinkable for him to bring America to the brink of war in order to create an image of a “war president” too indispensable to remove.
As a result, the press corps has been busy this week reporting in granular detail virtually every aspect of Donald Trump’s decision last week to target and kill Iran’s top general in Baghdad. Everything, that is, short of reporting the plain, obvious and unbearable truth: the president ordered a man’s death because he was impeached.
That reporters and editors in Washington, D.C, find ways to avoid seeing the plain truth was brought to mind by this morning’s Wall Street Journal. In a piece about the president’s new national security team—how its “cohesion” resulted in Soleimani’s assassination—seven esteemed reporters committed one of journalism’s professional sins. They buried the lede. Nearly 30 paragraphs into a 2,200-word story, they said:
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said (my italics).
Now, these are unnamed sources. They were speaking on background. In isolation, I wouldn’t make much of this. But in context, it matters—so much so, it warrants its own reporting, which we have not yet seen. That context would be the absence of legitimate non-political reasons for ordering Soleimani’s death. In all the reporting I’ve read, administration officials can’t keep their stories straight. On the one hand, that suggests no good reason. On the other, that suggests the most obvious one.
The buried lede suggests something else worth exploring. The president may not have been alone in seeking to please Republican senators who will sit in judgement of him during the impeachment trial. It may be that a Republican senator—Lindsey Graham comes to mind—encouraged the president to act on Soleimani. In that case, we would have to face yet another unbearable truth: some Republicans in the United States Senate are conspiring with the president in defrauding the people to maintain power.
Though unbearable, it’s plain and it’s obvious. The Republicans really are dumping constitutional principles once dearly and closely held for the sake of power. Graham and other Republicans declared their intent to violate preemptively the oath all impeachment jurors take to “do impartial justice, according to the Constitution and law.” Graham and Mitch McConnell, the current Senate majority leader, were highly principled during the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton. Now that the defendant is a Republican, however, those principles are beside the point. Both worked hard to ensure Trump a rapid acquittal without his having to work too hard for it.
What’s good for Clinton is not good for Trump—that’s not a matter of hypocrisy. I can’t stress that enough, because that’s another unbearable truth. There are two value systems, according to the Republican theory and practice. There is one set of laws, rules and norms for Republicans. There’s another set for Democrats. One protects. One punishes. The GOP benefits enormously when the press corps sees just one.
It seemed hypocritical when Rand Paul, a Republican senator, said yesterday he was ready to debate separations of powers after administration officials told him and GOP Senator Mike Lee not to talk about military intervention in Iran. Lee said “it was un-American. It’s unconstitutional. And it’s wrong.” Their Democratic colleagues might have thought they prepared to support the conviction of Trump for the same offense. Lee made it clear he wasn’t. He told Fox News Thursday the president is the best.
Again, this isn’t hypocrisy. According to Republican theory and practice, Republicans get to be principled. Democrats do not. Republicans have the right to respect and deference. Democrats do not. When the Republicans impeached a Democrat, they stood on high moral ground. When the Democrats impeached a Republican, according to Republicans, the Democrats did no such thing. The Republican got to call witnesses. Democrats do not. There are two value systems—separate and unequal.
That, to me, is not just a plain truth. It’s not just an unbearable truth. It’s a pernicious truth. The Republican Party can and will commit unthinkable acts to maintain power—like permitting foreign interference and encouraging acts of war, not to mention suppressing the vote and enshrining minority rule in constitutional and statutory law—even if those acts slowly eat away the foundations of our democratic covenant.
Now imagine the press corps reporting the obvious truth.
I think things would be different.
THIS SHOWS THAT AGAIN THE WHITE HOUSE IS LYING AND USING CYA REASONING TO DENY THAT AMERICA JUST ENGAGED IN AN ACT OF WAR AGAINST A SOVEREIGN NATION BY ASSASSINATING ONE OF IT'S STATE OFFICIALS IN VIOLATION OF THE HAGUE AGREEMENT THIS IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY AND A WAR CRIME WHICH IS WHY THE USA DENIES THE LEGITIMACY OF THE NUERNBERG COURT THE ICC BY ANY OTHER NAME.
MORE STORIES
Trump may have weighed impeachment before killing Iran’s Soleimani
The Wall Street Journal reports Trump weighed impeachment concerns when opting to kill Iran's Soleimani.
Trump Told Associates Soleimani Strike Was Needed To Curry GOP Senators' Favor For Impeachment Vote — Report
What influenced President Donald Trump to order the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani last week? Reports from a number of sources have ...
Trump ordered Soleimani attack to appease Republicans he views as important for impeachment, report says
Donald Trump ordered the airstrike that killed an Iranian general last week at least in part due to fears about his upcoming impeachment trial in the Senate, ...
Trump assassinated Soleimani to gain favor with key GOP senators vital to supporting him during impeachment trial: WSJ
It has long been said that President Trump only acts in his own self-interest, not the nation's. And while in recent days President Trump has described the Iranian ...
Trump Reportedly Says Impeachment Played Role in Striking Soleimani, Felt ‘Pressure to Deal With’ Him From GOP Sens
President Donald Trump had impeachment on his mind when he decided to order the strike that killed Iranian Quds Forces leader Qasem Soleimani according ...
Trump reportedly connected impeachment trial, Soleimani airstrike
Trump was impeached for putting political interests above national security interests. It'd be amazing if did the same thing during the impeachment process.
Trump privately admits he killed Soleimani “under pressure” from upcoming impeachment trial: report
Trump reportedly said that "he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators" key to his trial.
Trump said he launched Iran strike 'under pressure' from GOP impeachment jurors
A new report claims Trump was concerned about support from Senate Republicans ahead of his impeachment trial when he made the decision to take out the ...
No comments:
Post a Comment