430 Comments

Incredible that anyone who was in that Capitol that day could even consider voting to acquit. Since that day, even during that day as those six senators continued to object to the count even AFTER a coup attempt -- a coup attempt! -- I have been asking myself how many would have had to have been murdered that day. How many police officers? One was not enough, clearly. How many senators and representatives? How many members of their staff? How many members of their families who happened to be there that day? Two? Five? 10? 20? 50? 100? 200? 500?

It's only a mysterious combination of dumb luck and some kind of cosmic intervention that prevented the deaths of more people. Those rioters were there to kill. Kill our elected leaders. Murder them in OUR capitol building, perhaps hang them in their crude but functional gallows in broad daylight.

What on God's Earth would it take for these senators to impeach (just freakin' impeach -- not indict, not criminally convict, not sentence, not put in jail, not execute, just impeach!) the man who incited those rioters? And yes, he got hot and heavy with his demonic lies after he lost, but that man was inciting this from BEFORE the day he took office. Well before.

I truly want to know what it would take.

Expand full comment

I agree. It is incredulous. The few days after January 6th it seemed they might be woke but it was an aberration that didn't last. On Jan. 19: "The mob was fed lies,” McConnell said. “They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.” Will McConnell vote to convict and bring some other Republicans with him? I believe it is still an open question. I hope it is.

Expand full comment

Oh, I definitely think it is still an open question. I only meant what would it have taken for them to, without hesitation, convict the hell out of him immediately?

Expand full comment

It would have taken those legislators who did not vote to impeach the difficult step of losing their blind ambition, self-concern, and desire for power. Maybe they would even have had to lose the illusion that they and their judgment matter to our future, as if their ideological positions were paramount. They would have had to place the nation above their careers in politics.

Expand full comment

Yes, I'm with you on that. The betting odds are quite long although it has gone from about 5% on conviction on January 24th to 8% yesterday.

Expand full comment

Cathy, I believe you are incredulous (so am I), but "it" is incredible. It really is.

Expand full comment

Never knew the distinction. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Sorry, I'm an obsessive former English teacher.

Expand full comment

I applaud the way you explained the difference. You must have been (and still are) a very good teacher

Expand full comment

Thanks. There are lots of otherwise good writers who make errors like the incredulous/incredible one, or affect/effect, or "I want you to lay down and get some sleep", and there are many other errors that frequently get past copy editors (also in the NYT and WaPo), and it drives me crazy, but of course I'm nuts, and I have to admit I make these mistakes too. I once corrected the effect/affect error in a NYT comment, and the guy thanked me but pointed out an error (a big one!) I had made in my correction. But I think most people who post comments prefer to do so in correct English, so I just try to lend a hand now and then.

Expand full comment

It is actually logical when one thinks about it although English grammar is frequently illogical! Not to worry. I prefer to have someone correct me and I liked being incredulous. ... Made me smile!

Expand full comment

English has many rules that are honored only in the breach. Consider this nonsensical but grammatically correct sentence:

"The tough coughs as he ploughs through the dough in the lough."

1 spelling, 5 different pronunciations. Where's the rule???

As the French (and Stuart) would say, "ca n'existe pas."

Expand full comment

I’ve thought about that a lot too, and I really don’t want to know the answer. Far too many national tragedies have been marked only by “thoughts and prayers” and then quickly consigned to the dustbin of history. “We must move forward and begin healing....”

Expand full comment

I'm trying to play the long game in my mind about all of this. It's only been a month since the insurrection happened. In our quick fix society where you hardly have to wait for anything anymore, I'm taking a step back to look at the bigger picture. Politics is changing and since 1/6. I come from the same mindset at HCR in that those senators who vote 'nay' for impeachment and / or conviction will be used front and center from here until midterms and the next POTUS election as traitors to our democracy. It will be relentless. Meanwhile, President Biden continues to help the people. In ways that have been missing for at least 4 years and in ways that are bringing quick relief. And most of all hope that the government does care about its citizenry.

Expand full comment

Since there has been some discussion about word choice below, I'll add my two cents worth: Only the House can impeach. The impeachment is the charge. It is the Senate's duty, once they've received the article(s) of impeachment, to try the impeached official. My hope is that there will be enough business GOP senators eager to purge the party of the QAnon/Tea Party faction to listen carefully to the evidence during the trial and to vote to convict. It is also my hope that further impeachments will be delivered for at least 2 senators and a generous handful of representatives. O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

Expand full comment

Thanks for inducing us to look up frabjous. It's a good day when we learn something!

Expand full comment

I hope you took the opportunity to read the entire poem, "Jabberwocky." Sometimes, I feel that Democrats' talking points are as comprehensible to Republicans as that poem was to the first graders to whom I read it when I was a volunteer classroom aide in high school. (I certainly learned more from that lesson than any 1st grader did - to get them to start thinking about playing with understanding some new and strange language, I should have tried some scaffolding first - the other teachers here will understand what I mean by scaffolding.) The problem with the Republicans in the Senate, however, is not that they don't understand the concepts, but that, in the words of their leader when then Senator Joe Biden once tried to talk about a bill he thought McConnell should support, "You must be under the mistaken impression that I care."

Expand full comment

(((He chortled in his joy)))

Expand full comment

Nothing will convince them! They recognize that their now permanent status as a national minority party, saved from ignominy only by gerrymandering and control of local party mechanisms, requires alliances! Right now, they have welcomed as allies the conspiracy-driven nut jobs on the right, evangelicals, pro-gun groups, pro-life groups and those who are still fighting the Civil War. But it could be anyone. Who's next? Vegetarians? Prohibitionists? They are that desperate.

Expand full comment

As a vegetarian turned full vegan, I can testify they won't get much traction from that group. We actual have ethics!

Expand full comment

Not to say meat-eaters don't have. I live with one and our politics are the same, if our food choices aren't.

Expand full comment

We are living, breathing and suffering from homemade corruption. It's not new here, just almost as blatant as blatant gets.

Expand full comment

I watched the film "The Dig" the other night, which is about the Sutton Hoo archaeological find in Suffolk, England, on the eve of the British entry into WWII, and what I'm feeling tonight is that kind of quiet, dreadful waiting, knowing that tomorrow will start a process that will change the shape of the US for decades to come, for good or for ill. There is no real predicting of the outcome.

What saddens me is that there is a clear path in all this that is right: right for the rule of law, right for the integrity of the government and the nation, right for the people's hope for the future. But the rightness of that path is completely irrelevant to the political calculation that will take place over the next week. The Congress is filled with people who would rather rule Hell for ten minutes, than serve in Heaven, and all their effort is bent to bringing about those ten minutes. They care nothing for what comes after.

Expand full comment

I too watched "The Dig" the other night. Excellent film in a very English style, obviously and Ralf Fiennes was so very ggod...as usual. However I didn't get a sense of foreboding from the theme, rather a sense of attachment to history and the importance of the "human" approach as opposed to the technocratic. The point of the film was the discovery of a fantastic treasure which effectively changed what we knew of our forbears. The gift of the "golden horde" found in the Anglo-saxon "royal burial mound" under the buried royal "barge" (like the viking Drakkar but several hundred years earlier and probably from Jutland) to the British Museum was an affirmation that history and society is the concern and responsibility of all the people and not just a few.....as is the furure.

Expand full comment

The sense of foreboding that I got in "The Dig" related to the people knowing that War was coming, and waiting for the onslaught. The point of the message of the film, to me, was that goodness will prevail in the end. Basil Brown's work was not mentioned by the British Museum initially but he finally was given the recognition he was due. I found it a very refreshing and beautiful film. I wish there were more like it!

Let us hope that right will prevail in the current trial, for the sake of our children and grandchildren.

Expand full comment

I agree. The loss of death on several levels at once: letting go of past misconceptions in the dig, the letting go of the mother by the son, the step into the jeopardy the war brings, in an instant, to life and a way of life.

The foreboding was all there but a cohesive hope entered in that stunningly moving scene of mother and son in the newly dug spine of the anncient funeral barge.( Also in the reverencing of what history tells us by the British who had the good sense to keep their antiquities safe from bombs by removing them from museum to the underground!!)

Expand full comment

That war changed totally the structure of European society breaking the predominance of a "landed" elite. The foreboding for the war was of course strong, as you rightly point out, but also the thought of her own death and what would happen to her son with neither mother nor father to care for him....a second theme of the "human" role of Basil Brown and his wife.

Expand full comment

My father fought in the RN, and most of my family of that generation. Yes, Stuart, I was thinking of your second point too and agree. I didn't mention that because I notice this comments page has rather been taken over by the lengthy opinions of some... and I was trying not to do the same. The scene of the boy and his mother spending precious time in the ship at night was one of the most touching I have ever seen. Just beautiful, and based on a true story, I will watch it again.

Expand full comment

Ditto on the "takeover of lengthy opinions."

Expand full comment

Your thoughts are truly welcome and "betray" both sensitivity and insight. The more we have of these in our discussions, the better.

Expand full comment

That’s what I felt when watching the film, Sally.

Expand full comment

Well said, Joseph. We badly need public servants who will do the right thing.

The Dig looks fascinating and I'll check it out. Perhaps you already know Foyle's War on PBS, set in the same place and time. Along with cracking murder mysteries, it's about the fierce pursuit of normalcy and the rule of law in abnormal times.

Expand full comment

Yes... you’re probably right. 😞

Expand full comment

Unfortunately this is true— I also watched The Dig and loved the film.

Expand full comment

Republicans know they will never win another national election without massive turnout from white supremacist organizations. Every Republican vote for Trump acquittal will be a vote for white supremacy. There is no gray area here whatsoever. If Trump is acquitted, from that day forward every American who casts a vote for a Republican candidate for any office from dog-catcher to POTUS will be doing so with the complete self-knowledge that such a vote instantly identifies him or her as enablers (and fans) of white supremacy in America. At that point, they undoubtedly will still continue to insult themselves and decent Americans everywhere by continuing to yap about imaginary Republican principles (taxes, deficits, all the usual ridiculous BS they have gotten away with for decades). But the cat is way out of the bag, the toothpaste is way out of the tube and if it quacks like a racist duck, it IS a racist duck ... as surely as the sentence you just read is the most tortured metaphor you will read this week (lol).

Expand full comment

Still know a great deal of people who don’t care and continue to be proud to be Republican. A colleague is so adamant about her stance that she’s requested white cake with white icing for her birthday. But it’s Texas. Often determined and seldom on the right side of sensible.

Expand full comment

No mystery there. With the exception of a tiny minority of really rich Americans who benefit from tax breaks for the wealthy, there is not a single Republican in America who chooses the GOP for any core "principle" other than white supremacy. I repeat: "NOT A SINGLE REPUBLICAN". I actually admire your colleague's self-awareness, which is very unusual for a Republican.

Expand full comment

Republicans ALSO know in their heart of hearts, and certainly now in Georgia, that they will never win another national election unless they change the voting laws and make it more difficult for minorities--who will all together soon be the MAJORITY-- and POC to vote. Stacey Abrams here in Georgia is already on it and is calling out GA GOP operatives who are trying to make it much harder to vote by mail or by absentee. Expect a fight.

Expand full comment

Every state needs Stacy Abrams. . . .

Expand full comment

Agreed. And there’s also abortion - a single issue for many Republican voters who will go to hell and back to fight it.

Expand full comment

Abortion is one of those "issues" or "principles" that was entirely created by Republican "think tanks" ... (i.e. Roger Ailes) to provide cover for racist evangelicals. Ask anyone from any part of the Country who is older than 60 if they ever heard one peep about abortion from evangelicals before FOX News and right-wing radio MADE it an issue that racists could use to explain their voting preferences. After all, who can attack God? This same analysis is true for EVERY phony Republican "principle". None of these phony "principles" was ever mentioned in day-to-day dialogue before they were "created". And in the case of FOX News, they were created simply for profit, and they paid off big. Roger Ailes was one of the most despicable humans to ever exist on planet Earth, but an evil genius, for sure. He (via FOX News) almost single-handedly provided the sound-bites that millions of millions of Americans use daily to rationalize and explain their venal racism ... to themselves, their families, and their friends. The sooner Americans come to understand that all their "principles" are total BS, the closer decent people will be to winning the Second Civil War. (Don't you love how the "country music fraternity" is so proud of saying Morgan Wallen's n-word blurt "just isn't us". That statement is as ridiculous as a Republican saying he or she isn't a racist.)

Expand full comment

Stephen--you are quite right that the abortion issue was "ginned up" by those hoping to politicize previously disparate personal and religious beliefs--the disgusting, venal, but highly effective Roger Ailes helping to create the opinion waves his minions then rode. For historical background on the evolution of evangelical thinking on the issue see:

https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/how-southern-baptists-became-pro-life/

https://billmoyers.com/2014/07/17/when-southern-baptists-were-pro-choice/

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/baptist/sbcabres.html

and, of course, many of their leaders being seduced by the offers of greater exposure and political power.

Expand full comment

Thank you very much for these links. I am definitely guilty of being a disciple of Bill Maher's opinion-forming methodology: "I don't really need the facts; I just know I'm right." I grew up in the Deep South and luckily for me I had parents who were relentlessly committed to pointing out the absurd hypocrisy and mendacity (and utter stupidity) of "educated" racists in our community. As a result, I developed a remarkably accurate "racist bullshit meter", which began going off with increasing regularity once FOX News became the "drug of choice" that allowed moron racists to sound-bite their way to racist respectability.

Expand full comment

You're quite welcome. I'm glad they were of help. Developing a range of crap detectors is an important part of growing up. (Studying history helped me: "If the Rebs were such great fighters, how come they lost?" etc.) Sadly, a substantial number of people fail to properly equip themselves.

Expand full comment

Agree. ❤️🤍💙

Expand full comment

Stephen, just on the side: Bravo!! for "such a vote instantly identifies him or her" (instead of the abominable, wide-spread "identifies them". At last. Thank you!!

Expand full comment

HCR keeps talking about ads that “write themselves”, implying that appeals to facts will sway voters. It’s hard to believe that. The ads for the last election also wrote themselves. Trump mishandled the pandemic badly, causing hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths. Trump separated babies from their mothers, and put them in cages. Trump gleefully enabled white supremacists. Trump oversaw the biggest plunge in employment in decades. Trump ignored climate change, pushing coal and oil. Trump alienated our allies. Trump lied thousands of times. Trump lined his own pockets at the expense of taxpayers. Trump belittled soldiers and attacked war heroes. Ad after devastating ad. Do ads matter? 74 million people voted for an incompetent, corrupt, dishonest cretin. 10 million more than voted for him in 2016. After Trump’s disastrous first term, 10 million more wanted to re-elect him! The ads may write themselves, but if Republican voters remain as ignorant, bitter and racist as they have been, the ads won’t matter.

Expand full comment

I think we must focus on increasing our voter base. Chip away at the "ignorant and bitter". This group is vulnerable. And, most importantly, let's everyone of us take a page out of Stacey Abrams book and register voters, particularly young voters. And let's start now.

Expand full comment

JR, when you put it all out there like that it makes for an almost insurmountable feat to overcome the divided Nation we find ourselves in. I hope enough of us will prevail and I pray the Senate Republicans choose country over party. Good over evil... we are at the cliffhanger before the sequel right now!

Expand full comment

A lot depends on where ad space/time is sold. If Lincoln Project had targeted Fox News as their ad space it would have had a greater effect, I think, but I suspect the Rupertians wouldn't permit that.

Expand full comment

The Lincoln Project ran a lot of its ads on Fox News stations. I think the bigger issue is that Republican voters aren’t rational, they don’t make voting decisions based on facts, policies or records. It’s all “own the libs” and “hooray for my team”. Which is also why Republican voters are cheering Marjorie Taylor Greene and attacking Liz Cheney. That’s about as irrational as it gets.

Expand full comment

Owning the libs isn't why the 100+ people I know voteefor the con man. Abortion is the only reason they voted for him. And a heavey percentage of them are college educated. One is a lawyer and another works for a top secret department (he refers to a "purple box") in the federal government. And while, I personally have no belief in god, I do know that 99% were raised Catholic.

When I married my first husband, he wanted a mass so I had to take lessons with a priest to learn how to be a good Catholic.

What I learned was the priest was a drunk who only wanted to know all about my sex life, would I have a ton of kids and come to church every Sunday.

I can tell you that the ads on Fox News usually doesn't matter. I got to spend six weeks taking care of a friend who watches them exclusively. Usually when ads came on the sound was muted, especially if it was a political ad that went against what they believed. I had listened to her parrot the talking points they say for years and tried to show how they were wrong, but she refused to listen especially when it went against what she felt.

This was my best friend of 45+ years who when I met her was a former Catholic, pot smoking lib who was open to listening and thinking. She was also a single mom working hard to make ends meet while also going to school.

She totally changed after she met her first husband and they found religion. A tough hard religion where you couldn't wear pants, watch TV, play cards, etc.

She became this angry person who blamed everyone but herself for her mistakes.

I finally had to call it quits because of all the anger and chaos in her life. And to add insult to injury, she started tee heeing about her son moving to a town where Mexicans and the majority and her son might have little "tee hee" Mexican kids. My son's grandmother was born and raised in Puerto Rico and that just hit hard and broke my heart.

David Herrick, I get the "lay" thing. My ex father in law was an English professor who was always going on about that. We didn't talk much, he was always correcting me and not in a good way. I like the way you did way better. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Heartbeaking and disgusting, the role of "The Church." When I got married to a heathan, he dudn't have to take lessons in the Catholic faith, he just had to be "approved by the pastor. We were interviewed separately, me , the Catholic, first. For 20 minutes I was lectured and brow beaten because I didn"t go to church every Sunday, and won't my dear mother be devastated when he wouldn't allow me to get married in her church. Next was my fiance', and I was a nervous wreck waiting, 25 minutes, 30 ... Finally they came out, the priest's arm over my Presbyterian fiance's shoulders, laughing and saying, "You can get married in my church anyday! Welcome!" Huh? On the ride home he explained that the priest's brother, also a priest, lives in the town we had settled in, and since my fiance' played basketball in the church league for the Baptists against the Catholic church there, he was a good guy. Decades later it was revealed, posthumously, that the priest's brother was a pedophile who had preyed on hundreds of young boys. No, I don't go to church.

Expand full comment

I agree with you about the overlap between trumpism and far-right branches of religion, but it's not just Catholics. In my own family, the trumpanistas include one Catholic, two Protestant Evangelicals, and one Reform Jew (who I believe went over to the dark side to save her marriage, but I also know of Orthodox Jews on that side).

Expand full comment

Yes, this is a problem with the majority of this Republican base... voting for irrational reasons. But, do the Republican leaders really want this faction to be the face of the Republican Party? Don’t they know it will ultimately be the demise of the true Republican Party? Maybe it’s time to make a break... as messy as it will be. Let trump and QANON have the craven sycophants and the real Republican Party can keep the thoughtful voters and start over. In my dreams...

Expand full comment

Thanks JR! I avoid Fox like the plague, so the only time I saw the ads was online. I appreciate the clarification. Yeah--irrational is their jam, alas.

Expand full comment

The Lincoln Project liked running ads on Fox News because they knew Trump would see them.

Expand full comment

😁

Expand full comment

I have the best TV in the world. It doesn't get Fox.

Expand full comment

"... [For Republican Senators] there will be no escaping the consequences of their choices."

Yesterday HCR posited that a GOP vote not to convict Trump might not be the slam dunk it appears to be. Today she suggests that Democrats might effectively leverage GOP objections to passing Biden's coronavirus relief bill.

I don't pretend to know how either supposition will turn out but I do know this: Unless and until the GOP faces ANY consequences for their four years supporting Trump, their posturing to attract Trump supporters in the future by objecting to the election today, and their failure to police the worst of Trump's transgressions, no reason for optimism exists.

For nearly give years we expected any one of Trump's comments or actions would be the last straw, the point at which Republicans would say "enough." But no straw was ever too heavy. The GOP masterfully bobbed and weaved and deflected, hoping to fatigue the country long enough to complete implementing the laws that would enable them to make minoritarian rule a done deal. Cages, voter suppression, violence against protesters, strong-arming foreign leaders, strong-arming Georgia's Secretary of State to "find" votes, and knowingly working up supporters for at least two months to obstruct Congress's Certification of the election results. None of that mattered. Manafort was jailed for campaign finance crimes only to be pardoned. Still not a peep. Convicted killers were pardoned. Crickets.

Trump's supporters probably don't realize that the tax cuts received in 2018 begin getting taken away in 2021, scheduled so the blame for the increase was laid at Biden's feet. The Senate refused to hear witnesses at the first impeachment trial. Senators reversed themselves on the propriety of filling a SCOTUS opening just weeks before an election, despite Lindsey Graham's recorded vow that we could hold him to his word that'd never happen again.

There's more. Of course there's more, yet they've lied and obstructed and deflected with impunity and many won reelection in spite of that. Congress and the wealthy have done what they want without concerns for the ethics, the legality, or the likelihood of consequences.

Our system is broken. We've lost any culture of accountability, of it ever really existed. Representatives represent money, not constituents. HCR's cautious optimism is no longer sufficient reason to believe. I, for one, fear that Biden's Administration is but a speed bump for those who wish to rule America, not lead it. I'm tired of McConnell and Paul and Cruz and Hawley and Gaetz and Gohmert and Greene and Jordan and DeVos and Ross and Meadows and all those who've either condoned or failed to speak up. I'm losing my faith that Americans can or even want to rebound from this era of paucity of character.

Show me that some or all of these bad actors will have to face the music. If not, I'm out.

Expand full comment

Justice for Trump's transgressions and Republican complicity comes on several levels:

- Impeachment trial vote

- Court of public opinion as it manifests in 2022 and 2024 votes

- Court of public opinion as it manifests in corporate support or boycotts

- Corporate support or lack thereof of PACs

- The many criminal and civil lawsuits pending in state and local jurisdictions

All the eggs are not in one basket.

Expand full comment

As long as the omlette is made and consumed!

Expand full comment

Ellie, I know the wheels of justice move slowly but it's not just about this impeachment. How long before corporations restart donations? Absent overturning Citizens United, that money isn't going into fighting corruption. Public opinion? I'm not too sanguine about that given the number of people who thought Trump had been ok so far. Congress has ceded certain responsibilities to the Executive. Congress isn't people with different views who try to find some common way forward, even if just to help the nation weather a pandemic.

The GOP has played the obstruction game masterfully. They fear Biden might succeed where they've failed. They're clinging on to Milton Friedman's "profit is the only objective" economics, and they fear the role of a supportive government envisioned in the Keynesian model. The Treasury published an analysis of Keynesian taxation vs Republican tax breaks, which showed that tax breaks, as a policy, had NEVER resulted in economic growth (I'm searching for the article that I read last week).

Trump's cabinet looked at their positions as an ATM. They came. They grifted. They left with whatever they could carry, and no one stopped them. This went on for four years and none of them had to fear that they'd be punished.

So all the eggs may not be in one basket but a lot of them are cracked to start with.

Expand full comment

Good contrast between Miltie and Maynard.

Expand full comment

Wonderful comment. I share your worry completely.

I understand what previous commenters have said about the fact that impeachment is a legislative function not executive, that Biden is trying to re-establish the guardrails that Trump trampled over, that Biden has also communicated his disdain for Trump etc.

My point is, that much as I applaud his Executive energy and more progressive bent than many of us could have dared wish for, he has clearly signaled a preference for disposing of the trial rapidly. This in turn has played into the fervent Republican desire that we somehow develop collective amnesia over January 6.

We need to stop for this trial. Stop, Give it full focus. This is an inflection point in American history. We have tut-tutted and wagged our fingers at all of Trump’s criminal and moral excesses. We have assumed that “right” would somehow prevail over might. And it has not happened.

Moral uneasiness prevented Trump’s re-election. That’s a good. But Biden had no coattails and the margins in the House and Senate are, respectively, slim and slimmest.

Yes Trump has bled supporters. But he has tens of millions who crave the “strength” he offers. Among those are many in positions of power who are working furiously to pave the way for Trump’s return or a surrogate’s ascendancy. Creeping fascism threatens to become galloping fascism.

Republican led legislatures are working to disenfranchise voters. Republican state parties are working openly to sow discord. And let us not forget a Supreme Court packed with conservative ideologues.

In theory, Biden has done all the right things in re the impeachment. In practice, he has signaled something that comes perilously close to disinterest.

We MUST accord this trial the attention it deserves historically. We must deliver a rebuke to Trump and followers that shows the full strength of democracy.

This is not a time for dewy-eyed optimism that Biden’s and Congress’ positive governance will assure continued control after 2022 and a re-election win in 2024, all resulting in the slow death of Trumpism. I fear it won’t.

The fire still rages.

Expand full comment

In ordinary times I would agree with your call to focus on the trial but millions of Americans are dying, millions are now homeless or on the brink, our economy is tanking until the virus is mastered. Biden’s focus is on real people.

Expand full comment

Eric, bingo. You said it much better than I did. Thanks.

Expand full comment

I agree: the problem goes very deep and the ‘morally uneasy’ have a slim majority. But I think Biden is trying hard to project disinterest, and is right to. The problem is his words—he seems to you to project *indifference*, which trivializes this grave matter. If I took his words seriously I’d worry about indifference too but he’s always been utterly incapable with language. I’ve been relieved that he’s speaking so little.

Expand full comment

Scott, I have spent the Trump years wondering about what would end up being the last straw as well. And now, here we are, post Trump and we are still waiting to see if the last straw will be heavy enough to collapse his fiefdom.

I've held off commenting the last couple days because I really haven't been able to add anything new or insightful but I've been thinking a lot about the implications of Trump being acquitted and here's what bothers me: we have to remember that narcissism and the thirst for power are not traits exclusively owned by people of any particular political party. To date, the Democrats have done a fairly good job being gatekeepers and defenders of our democracy. The Republican party, however, has had 40 odd years to nurture the arrogance of its leaders and grow the will of its legislators to dominate rather than lead. Republicans, for the most part, have dug in their heels and seem inclined to prop up Trump to the bitter end. If Trump skates it will be a strong signal to all politicians, present and future, regardless of party, that there is no such thing as accountability. I hate to think where this might lead especially now that some state level Republicans have doubled down on the insanity and lies and are forcing a false narrative on their constituents.

Expand full comment

Daria, that's just the point. Right now they're just daring someone to come after them. The odds are good that they have nothing to worry about.

Expand full comment

"If Trump skates it will be a strong signal to all politicians, present and future, regardless of party, that there is no such thing as accountability." Well put, Daria! My sentiments exactly- thank you!

Expand full comment

Yes, we may have to leave it to the courts. The Senate conviction of Trump would be important for the credibility of our democracy and Constitution, but jail time for the perpetrators is what's really needed.

Expand full comment

It's important but not enough to jail the people who carried out the former president's wishes. The perp himself, and his enablers in Congress, need to face due consequences for their behavior.

Expand full comment

I agree, the inciter-in-chief and all his enablers (conspirators?) need to face the consequences, starting with conviction by the Senate, followed by appropriate disciplinary measures in both houses of Congress, leading to trials in federal and state courts of all who committed felonies or serious misdemeanors. I mean, a lot of those folks storming the Capitol had some pretty clear criminal intent and no doubt knew they were breaking laws and committing felonies. Others were just partying hearty in a MAGAmoronic sort of way and along for the ride hoping to get some good You-Tube footage for friends and family back in good ole...wherever. Maybe a stiff fine and a stern talking-to will be enough for them. Let's just call it "tough love."

I think what happens to the foot soldiers in all this will be instructive to anyone thinking of joining a rightwing militia or white-supremacy org. or wondering if this Q-Anon thing is on the up-and-up.

We will know we have turned the corner on this when we see our ex-pres in an orange suit and ankle irons. But all this may take a while.

Expand full comment

Exactly.

Expand full comment

I wonder what "out" looks like.

Expand full comment

That's a very good question. I don't know - maybe it's disengagement. I'm a cancer patient/survivor. I was diagnosed just as the repeal and replace "debate" started. That's when politics became very personal. My tolerance for BS and stupidity is very low. I have tried very hard to teach my kids respect for the law, as I have done. It is unconscionable that this group of "leaders" has escaped unscathed for acts and behavior that would have them dismissed in an instant from most other jobs. Whatever stain impeachment leaves on Trump, the fact that the GOP was able to rationalize his actions as insufficient to convict was mind-blowing, and the same looks to be the case again.

Expand full comment

Stage-4 cancer survivor here, too, twenty years past. It does change your outlook.

Expand full comment

Melanoma veteran here; no doubt numerous seniors among LFAA readers have similar experiences. I got off quite easy (so far) compared to others. Stay well, people, and keep the comments coming.

Expand full comment

Congrats! Glad to see you here. The 4 or 5 people I know personally who have this subtype of Lymphoma have all had recurrences. One recurred twice, 10 years apart, one recurred 3x, first after 4 years then 2x in next 3. It could be back in 6 months or 5 years or never. So it's likely out there (that's why it's called incurable), but I don't spend much time on it.

Also, the delivery was bad! After seven weeks of diagnostics the orthopedic oncologist said "you have incurable Stage 4 cancer." Long pause while I'm trying to get my head around that. Then "but it's frequently treatable." I just stared at him and said, "Jesus, man, I could give you at least five ways of telling me that. Your delivery sucks!" Thing is, I really liked the guy. My treating oncologist has much better communication skills!!

Expand full comment

Colon. I went in on Thursday to check out a problem, they took X-rays and wanted me in surgery on Friday. They couldn't schedule it for Friday, so they scheduled it for Monday.

I still remember the first, irreverent thought that went through my mind when they gave me the diagnosis on Thursday: "Well, at least I won't have to worry about that fucking 401k any more."

Then it started to sink in. That was nearly 20 years ago, and no recurrence is expected at this point.

But it changes your outlook.

Expand full comment

Yikes. So how's the 401k?

Expand full comment

I know, it’s really dumbfounding!

I imagine surviving cancer is a huge life changer. So glad you made it and can share your wisdom and perspectives with the group.

Expand full comment

Mitzi, cancer has its moments. Mine is likely to be a lifelong nuisance. It's incurable but treatable and I'm in remission and I'm still standing and that's all a plus. You come out a different person than you went in. For me, it sharpened my awareness and appreciation but it also left me less tolerant - and tolerant wasn't what most friends would say is my best characteristic! Love the company (most!) in this group.

Expand full comment

Canada? Costa Rica? Botswana? Mauritius?

Expand full comment

I asked, because back in 2006, I was newly-married to my wife, a naturalized American citizen born in Colombia, and we were watching the Republicans play out their filthy racist game in the Bush/Cheney national catastrophe. SSDD (Same "Stuff" Different Day). I recall that in 2006, Bush invited the first Democrat into the White House in six years, Nancy Pelosi, and it was reported that the first question he asked her was, "Are you going to impeach me?" She said, "No."

In the two years before that, I was seeing the same authoritarian behavior we've seen under Trump, and started thinking my wife and I needed to leave the country: to establish a beach head elsewhere, for our children. It was interesting: for myself, I was angry, but not worried: I'm a white guy with mad tech skills. My wife, however, is a naturalized American citizen born in Colombia, and this was in the middle of the "Hispanics are taking our jobs" nonsense. I was worried. So I began researching the matter of leaving the US.

It isn't that easy.

Actual emmigration and re-naturalization pretty much ends for first-world target countries at age 55. The reason is simple: you haven't vested in their system, so you don't get any benefits. You can BUY your way into most countries, but prices generally start at $1M.

You can, of course, live as an ex-pat in a lot of places, like Costa Rica. Or Colombia. Or Mauritania. In that case, you're still tied to the US for citizenship, social security, etc. If the US goes full-on Nazi, your passport -- well, it would be like a German passport in 1940. As will be your American English, your American accent, your distinctly American attitudes, all of which are unconsciously racist in even the most well-meaning of us. It will be very hard to hide if "American" is the 21st century Nazi brand.

If that doesn't happen, then as an expat, you have three living options: full acculturation, American expat community, or "plantation owner." Plantation owner is the dream of being rich in an expansive villa on a beautiful island with wonderful food and happy "natives" surrounding you with their "quaint" customs and beliefs. It has a huge catch: the "rich" part.

An expat community is a ghetto: people who insist on remaining American, just living somewhere affordable in a different country, banding together with other Americans for mutual support and socialization. You can do that here. Retire to Florida.

Full acculturation means learning the language not only fluently, but (if possible) without an accent; the local customs; the local modes of polite behavior. That takes a LOT of research, and most of it needs to be in-situ. Immersion courses. Keeping your head low, and observing, observing, observing. Starting over, like a child. Moving to a Spanish-speaking country, for instance, it's one thing to learn the phrase "Hijo de puta," and to learn to speak it without an American accent. But learning when it is appropriate, and when it is not, is something children pick up unconsciously as they are growing up, and it's entirely situational. No one can tell you when it's appropriate, but they will certainly let you know if you get it wrong. Which you will.

If you attempt to acculturate, you will spend the rest of your life being "an immigrant." Everyone will know it. If you are a good enough person, they may accept you despite that. When you screw up, they will quietly roll their eyes, and mutter "American" under their breath.

I'm sorry for the long rant, but I think the "get out" option is a lot like the "trash this planet and move to Mars" fantasy. It's a daydream that takes energy away from our need to say, "NO! You cannot take my future from me!"

Expand full comment

Very fair question and I appreciate the considerations. I was really referring more to disengaging as much as possible. I don't have the rich part down.

I'm sorry you and your wife even had to think that way. What's weird here is that I know a lot of guys, in particular, who were first in line to help when I was sick but came out as big Trump supporters. So I'd trust them with my life but not my country. Sometimes I don't know if they believe that crap or lost their inhibitions because Trump had none. But had Trump won I'm certain I'd have left my club and community. I haven't seriously thought out international options.

Expand full comment

I don't find that to be such a stretch.

Don't want to launch on a rant about religion and politics, but the modern Republicans ally themselves with power-seeking religious bodies in a way that the Democrats do not, particularly the Evangelical and Fundamentalist coalitions.

I've been in a fair number of different flavors of Christianity from Evangelical Free through Episcopalian, and the members are generally kind and thoughtful as individuals, and do reach out to help other (white) people who are temporarily down on their luck, e.g. illness. They'll go the extra mile and then some. But it's also mixed with American industriousness, and far fewer reach out to "bums," including the homeless and especially non-whites. You generally have to be "worthy" to get the helping hand.

The Republicans are very in line with this. They don't mind handouts to the "worthy" (e.g. the wealthy industrialists), but they have a rabid distaste for handouts to the "unworthy" (e.g. poor people). I think that's at the root of why there is such a strong link between Evangelicalism and Republicanism.

I see from your picture that you are white (as am I). You are therefore presumptively "worthy." Had you been black and poor, I suspect you would not have found them first in line to help. Had your problem been, say, drug addiction brought on by economic despair, rather than cancer, odds are good there would have been no line for you at all: your illness would have been a moral failing, and you would not be worthy of help. Get yourself out of the gutter.

Expand full comment

Mauritius. Typo.

Expand full comment

A rather common error, including Reagan who (in)famously couldn't tell Mauritius from Mauritania. The latter has the edge in sand and slavery but not much else.

Expand full comment

Botswana would never let him in.

Expand full comment

Sorry to be unclear; my suggestions were opt-out options for Scott Krasner. If you refer to Trumpsky, yes, he has little to offer Botswana (which I visited for 10 days in 1986). Presumably he'd be impressed by the Kalahari Desert's sand-trap potential.

Expand full comment

Ha. Warmer. Mauritius appears to have some charm, Botswana is Africa's oldest democracy and least corrupt nation, but no ocean. Deal breaker. I'm open to suggestions!!

Expand full comment

Here's the deal on oceans: The Okavango Delta becomes an inland sea in the rainy season.

Expand full comment

Elegant solution!

Expand full comment

The crocs and hippos take it all in stride, as they have for eons.

Expand full comment

It’s helpful to remember that almost half a million American have died due to Covid over the last year. If only we had had a true leader in that time. I salute and have a great gratitude for the healthcare professionals who are now mobilizing to get shots in arms. Not so many would’ve had to die and many more would’ve been inoculated by now if we had only had an effective administration over the last 12 months. President Joe: keep doing what you’re doing, don’t let up, and Professor Richardson, please keep us up to date.

Expand full comment

There seems to be no acknowledgement by anyone involved that the impeachment trial will have deep historical resonance as well as immediate impact. The immediate impact seems to have declined into a messaging battle between the parties, almost as it would for any other issue.

It has been pointed out to Americans frequently in the past two weeks the precedent of an historically obscure Senator and Secretary of War - William Belknap being tried after he left office.

I find it galling that Biden waves Trump’s trial off with what could almost be described as petulance, because it interferes with his hard-driving agenda. “I’ll let the Senate sort it out”, is his dismissive point.

Whatever else one may say about Trump, he is not going to be an obscure historical figure. His *second* impeachment and trial are a watershed moment in American history. Yet, both Democrats and Republicans seem to regard it as a wearisome duty or, in the Republican case, an improper action. I would expect that of the Republicans. Not so the Democrats, especially those in the Executive Branch.

I do think the impeachment managers are putting heart and soul into it. The fact that the party as a whole is not astonishes me.

In many ways Trump supporters are in a moment of near ascendancy. The Arizona Senate came within a single vote today of imprisoning election managers for not turning the ballots over, so they could discover the corruption in Arizona’s presidential count and, presumably, turn the state back to the “45th President”. Michigan has got rid of the single Republican electoral official to vote to certify their results.

Trump himself feels assured he will be acquired and is planning vengeance on those Republicans who have not supported the brazen lie that he won.

The Democrats need to acquit themselves in this trial in such a way that they will be remembered historically as having unanimously seen the grave assault on democracy that was January 6.

Perhaps, if they weren’t attempting to rush this trial through, they might galvanize the public and make it a dire risk for anyone to vote against conviction. This would deliver a sharp rebuke to those actively plotting to conduct a resistance campaign against the legitimacy of Biden’s win.

I fear that history will judge the Democrats harshly if this trial gets resonance as only a pro forma attempt. There is a battle on for the soul of America. Trump’s forces need to be thoroughly routed by a complete delegitimizing of Trump himself. They do not seem to be headed in this direction.

Expand full comment

Disagree about Biden. This is a legislative function. He's made it clear what he thinks about Trump and his need to be held accountable. Biden is smart to focus on the pandemic etc.

Expand full comment

Biden is not somehow shirking, he is establishing principles. After four years of meddling and chaos across coequal branches of government, respecting the separation of powers makes an important statement. It signals that he's about his own job, and also doesn't preclude speaking out or a new approach in future.

Expand full comment

I concur with the larger point that the second impeachment trial is a monumental historical event. The outcome will profoundly affect the future and should be treated that way. Conducting, reporting, implementing, assessing and remembering it are all historic responsibilities too. The evidence being presented appears to be quite powerful and deserves respect, as does the bedrock idea that no one is above the law.

Expand full comment

“Guardrails”. President Biden is reestablishing guardrails and boundaries. We all know he cares deeply about protecting our democracy. We also know he does not trust the former president. President Biden has voiced his concern about the former president having access to secure information. We know where he stands on seeing justice prevail. But President Biden respects governmental norms and the Separation of Powers. “Guardrails”

Expand full comment

I fear that you have bought into the Trumpian idea of the "Unitary Executive". One that is all powerful, invades every sphere, and holds forth on every subject no matter which branch of government, which agency. I certainly agree that a President has a large bully pulpit. But that pulpit should be used wisely. If Trump was the President right now, he would be holding rallies and directing his followers to "fight" for a conviction. He would be all over the country, yelling, rousing, and "inspiring" the worst. Biden, meanwhile, is working everyday to return the country to its historic stability and economic prosperity. He doesn't care much about "winning" an election because if he doesn't succeed there will be no country to "win." I wish people understood that.

Expand full comment

Not to be misinterpreted, I will briefly elaborate.

1.

I have *not* bought into the Unitary Executive.

But I am a huge proponent of the *united* Democratic Party and I fear I’m not seeing it.

2.

I am not substituting “indifference” when I supposedly mean “disinterest”.

I meant indifference - at least when put against his own priorities.

My understanding is that neither Biden, Pelosi, or Schumer want witnesses in order that the trial be as expedient as possible.

I find this mind-bendingly shallow reasoning. Witnesses, properly selected, would give this trial enormous reach and perhaps affect the verdict. I’m indifferent to the President as witness, but White House figures who observed Trump as he watched 1/6 transpire, Capitol police, legislative aides would give us a much more nuanced picture.

If the Dem leadership (including Biden), has decided to ditch witnesses for expediency’s sake, it is a stunning dereliction of duty.

3.

I do not think Biden has to speak publicly. A contributor to this discussion painted a grotesque picture of him becoming Trumpier than Trump for political advantage. A careful reading of what I wrote would not suggest those are my feelings.

Biden doesn’t have to speak at all. It’s no doubt better that he doesn’t. But if he’s acting as a gatekeeper to squeeze the trial for his agenda, then he is not rising to the moment.

Expand full comment

I very much want to see witnesses too, not necessarily the Twice-Impeached Unnamed Former himself, but the many others involved on Jan 6. I'm sure the Managers' documentary evidence is substantial and persuasive, but live testimony has a visceral effect that transcends the limits of memory. Think of last year, when we heard and saw Dr Hill, the Vindman brothers and Amb Yovanovich; we respect these hero/ine/s because they bore witness. Force Hawley and Cruz to look in the eyes of Americans who almost died due to their seditious braying. Those two are a lost cause, but others may be swayed.

Expand full comment

TPJ, I think this an excellent point. Thank you for reminding me of the dramatic testimony of Hill, Vindman et al at the first impeachment trial. That really lends depth to the need for witnesses to bring home the reality of what happened. Apparently it’s still an open question. We can hope.

Expand full comment

Thanks Eric. I'd love to see the removed officials restored to their old positions, if they still want them.

There is merit in having a speedy trial given the many other crises, but I wonder if the trial is ill-timed. (Not impeachment; that was essential at the time.) Waiting a couple of months would give more time to settle the witness issue, collect evidence and have the criminal insurrection cases proceed. As weeks and months pass, the steady revelations about the insurrectionary coup will remorselessly lock in the guilt of conspirators, all the way up to the Former Unnamed.

Expand full comment

Janjamm you may be younger than me. We have never seen anyone so openly lust to be president, and for so long, as Biden. He cares about winning elections! He is also however sane. For which hallelujah!

Expand full comment

Michigan. Arizona. You bring up important points. “They will cheat next election”- Tim Snyder. What if the next election comes down to Michigan an Arizona? What if those in charge volunteer themselves to do what DT asked of Raffensburger (Georgia) in 2024? Yes, that is coming. That’s why this impeachment is so important.

Expand full comment

Michigan voters elected the incredible Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and also passed our Redistricting Commission proposal to end gerrymandering. But tgen, we also gave you Betsy Voss.

Expand full comment

Hi MaryPat, Michigan's new direction is most encouraging; thank you for your part in advancing it. BTW, we don't blame Michiganders for Cruella DeVos. Trumpsky dredged her out of MI and foisted her on the country.

Expand full comment

Points to the fact that we need to get out the vote for ALL elections - state and federal and municipal.

Expand full comment

All in. Working to this end. ❤️🤍💙

Expand full comment

May I ask how you are working to this end? Apparently there are over 100 pieces of Republican proposed legislation across the country that would make it harder to vote. Some of us are trying to fight back, based on Heather's Letters.

Expand full comment

Hello, Darcy! My previous efforts (postcards, phone and text banks) for 2018 and 2020 were most successful through Indivisible (specifically, Indivisible Westchester) and Vote Save America (a longtime supporter, as am I, of Stacey Abrams). There are other organizations, but these 2 are directing my energy and help regarding voting. I’m focusing on GA (Warnock!), TX, FL (long shot and complicated) and PA (where I grew up). If you want to discuss further my email address is gildedtwig@icloud.com. ❤️🤍💙

Expand full comment

Whatever works. Thank you both.

Expand full comment

Wow! What is happening at the state level is scary!

Expand full comment

YES, this is what happens when some state's voters are "asleep at the wheel", while others like Maine are zooming ahed with a Maine Climate Council to rebuild the entire economy, based on equity, ecology and economics.

Expand full comment

Ok guys, I just read a headline: Biden's strategy for impeachment trial = sit back and STFU!

I stand convinced

Expand full comment

Nice catch, Lynn. At first glance it seemed to be a critical swipe from Faux, Wash Times or some such. But the Politico article clearly shows that it's about strategy, not an insult.

Expand full comment

"I find it galling that Biden waves Trump’s trial off with what could almost be described as petulance, because it interferes with his hard-driving agenda. “I’ll let the Senate sort it out”, is his dismissive point."

I must respectfully disagree that the President was being either petulant or dismissive. He is respecting the duties of the separate branches of the federal government. He has also declined to direct the Justice Department to behave as his private attorney's office. I believe that in order for this trial to have the chance to be taken as anything other than revenge, President Biden needs to stay on track with his own job and interfere with the job of the Senate.

Expand full comment

I absolutely agree, Joe to needs to weigh in on this weighty moment.

Expand full comment

No ... think about the last four years. Trump spent all his time "governing" with his tweets, messages, and false narratives, making fun of his opponents, name-calling, shaming, humiliating, bullying, and on and on and on ... and. Well, you get my point. Biden has a full plate trying to save American lives and get our country back on track. He's done exactly the right thing letting the "Senate do it's job." Though we want him to fight back and send some shame Trump's way, Trump is doing just fine on his own. His ship is sinking, and it will. The courts will come back, and he will be held accountable in the end. Biden doesn't need to feed into the melee that is the Republican platform. Let them lie themselves into non-existence. He should push forward, push positive, push reform. Often silence is complicity ... but it is also power. It drives Trump crazy because he wants Biden to take the bait. Graham wants Biden to take the bait. Hawley, Cruz, Greene, Boebert, all of them want Biden to take the bait. It's driving them insane that he won't ... nor will his staff (i.e. Jen Psaki). They are on point. The "Trumpublicans" want to deflect from the Truth, but in the end, the truth will survive Trump. It will. We just have to get through this. And remember, thousands have left the Republican station and jumped on the "neverTrumper" train since January 6. Thousands.

Expand full comment

Excellent points! I think Biden is doing the right thing by letting the house and senate decide. I also think if he got involved the republicans would brand him with trying to get even with t**** for not conceding the election.

Expand full comment

Thank you Betsy. My feelings exactly. President Biden is on track for our country.

Expand full comment

I agree. There are any number of things Biden can and must play hardball with. Trumps impeachment is not one of them.

Expand full comment

Yes! Thank you. Biden doesn't want to be entangled. He has much more important things to do.

Expand full comment

Ok, of course, that's the high road. Ty for reminding me.

Expand full comment

I strongly disagree. I think he is taking precisely the right tack--telegraphing his contempt for Trump and his disrespect for norms and the rule of law--while staying in his lane as Chief Executive and carrying on the business of governance.

Expand full comment

Agree. Biden is being Presidential. We just don't remember what that is.

Expand full comment

If he could speak better that would be clearer: “Let the Senate sort it out” does give the impression that he can’t be bothered. He can barely open his mouth, unscripted, without making a gaffe but I think a lot of them are meaningless. Not all. (I can never forgive his comment when Obama won the nomination that “he’s clean and well-spoken.”) His deeds in this case are OK with me: separation of powers is important to restore.

Expand full comment

Pardon me, Mary, but let's leave behind the hoary canard that Biden doesn't communicate clearly. Presumably you're aware of his speech handicap, which shapes popular perceptions, but doesn't really affect his policies and actions. Far better to see it not as obstacle but as inspiration.

In 2020 I had a student in anguish over his own stuttering and struggles with class participation. He was immensely buoyed when told that a man with a speech handicap was on the verge of becoming president; the student's mood and work improved. Biden resembles, to a lesser degree. two other leaders who triumphed over their own disabilities: FDR (polio) and Grant (alcoholism), spurring countless others to overcome their own limitations.

As for the Obama remark, it is routinely misinterpreted. It referred to Obama's distance from Chicago's history of political corruption, not to personal hygiene. Some of Biden's gaffes are due to listeners' flaws, not his. Similar to Jimmy Carter, his public persona is one of rather artless simplicity. But like Washington, Grant, Truman or Carter, the closer one looks, the more impressive he appears.

Expand full comment

TPJ I never said and wouldn't say anything about his stutter, which is under triumphant control in fact. My Uncle Tommy and one of my dearest lifelong friends are stutterers, also heroic in their struggle with it--one is a professor now-- though they are awed by what Biden manages in front of 100s and often millions of people. I take my hat off to his discipline and commitment, and I see those virtues in his behavior in matters more weighty for the state of our demcracy. But neither Uncle Tommy nor my friend Jeff misuse *language* as Biden does, which is all I was speaking about, and my examples were drawn from that. This is a really cheap shot. I am surprised to see it.

Expand full comment

TPJ I don't know why you think I don't support Biden! In this thread of comments I have been trying to *counter* the doleful view that opened it, that he is trivializing the grave matters at stake in this 2nd impeachment by staying off the topic. He is not, as I keep trying to say. He just isn't good with *language* (repeat, I'm not talking about the neurophysiology of vocalization!), and inadvertently gave that impression by saying "let the Senate sort it out"--which dismissive language I don't believe represents his real attitude.

He is a serious person, and as I said, it is in his deeds that I read his intentions and achievements. Which have been many in the last 3 weeks! You are right to be buoyed up by the model of this powerful, experienced, accomplished man--who has done a few things I deplore in his long career, but unlike most of us has learned to know better--and has as a result done better! I'm with you in my admiration.

Expand full comment

I won't respond to whether or not there was a cheap shot, but I would like to say that any assessment of Biden's ability to communicate is purely subjective. I find him to be very clear and not given to overtalking. For me that works. I understand that you would like him to say more. I think both points of view have merit.

Expand full comment

You are probably right.

Expand full comment

I will join the no vote here. This is the legislative branch's responsibility, not the executive branch.

Expand full comment

Yes, it is a sad fact that current politicians' visions seem to be set rather too far short of their long term legacy and to focus too much on their next election. It would be helpful if more valued the way they will be judged by history. Biden has taken a clear stance that he will choose well qualified people and allow them to do their jobs, and although the American people have chosen the Senators, Biden has made it clear he will respect the divisions of government. It is neither petulant nor dismissive to show the restraint to do so. I agree America today is hardly a fair setting for this trial, just as many of the jurors should recuse themselves for conflict of interest. If this were another type of trial they would move it to someplace where a fair trial could be conducted - out of the country I suppose!

Expand full comment

Out of the country, you say? They could hold the impeachment trial in Key West. It's out of this world!

Expand full comment

Eric O’Donnell I agree in principle, but I think you’re reacting here to Biden’s always unfortunate wording (unless he’s scripted)—“sort it out” is trivializing indeed but he’s always been a very bad communicator off the cuff. No sense of language. He is rumored to read poetry but I doubt it.

Expand full comment

Biden is often an outstanding communicator. Does anyone doubt the meaning and import of the following statements?

"Here's the deal."

"We must end this uncivil war."

"Keep yappin' man!"

No sense of language? Hah. Biden has already bequeathed a notable heritage of immortal phrases to America.

Expand full comment

"Shut up, Man"

Expand full comment

Many thanks for resurrecting the word, "wastrel." I'll be working it into conversation every chance I get for the foreseeable future.

Expand full comment

Yes, that one puts a smile on the face.

It brings to mind a scene in "Jeeves & Wooster" where Bertie's aunt was asked about him, and she blurted out "he's a wastrel!" (Blurt is another good one.)

Expand full comment

How about Oscar Wilde's "The importance of being ernest"...for instance: Quoting Algernon and Lady Bracknell

"Really, if the lower orders don’t set us a good example, what on earth is the use of them? They seem, as a class, to have absolutely no sense of moral responsibility".

“If I am occasionally a little over-dressed, I make up for it by being always immensely over-educated.”

“In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing.”

“I never change, except in my affections.”

“Never speak disrespectfully of Society, Algernon. Only people who can’t get into it do that.”

Another part of society atomized by the 1914-18 war

Expand full comment

Keep the literary references coming, people; many are new to me. As a historian, I prefer books with footnotes and indexes. I know I'm missing a lot. So much to read, so little time ....

Expand full comment

No matter how many times I've read those stories (dozens), they are my go-to for reliably provoking fall-off-my-chair laughter.

Expand full comment

As a veteran commentator here's my take on the impeachment of President Loophole -- https://dianefrancis.substack.com/p/president-loophole-on-trial

Expand full comment

Love this, Diane! You hit the nail squarely on the proverbial head. You not only laid out strategies for the impeachment managers straight from Roy Cohen’s playbook but described Trumps tactics perfectly:

“Trump’s moral compass has always been Cohn’s Code and consists of three tenets: Never settle or surrender; counter-attack and counter-sue immediately; and no matter how much trouble comes along always claim victory and never admit defeat. This is the mantra of all hustlers, and is why loopholes are for sale across America and why laws must be toughened.“

President Loophole! Thank you.

Expand full comment

Existing laws must be enforced energetically against domestic terrorists and law breaking white supremacists. It is important to be very, very careful about toughening laws, so that the new ones to do not target people of color and pro-democracy protesters. Florida is already jumping to restrict legitimate protests under this guise.

Expand full comment

How to fight fire with fire. Wish there was a way to get this to the House Managers! Thanks, Diane.

Expand full comment

An earlier post gave Raskin's Washington phone number: 202-225-5341

Expand full comment

maybe Twitter would be faster. Srsly.

Expand full comment

Please send this column to the House impeachment managers.

Expand full comment

I just have to comment again. Use Cohn's tactics in this trial? YES! See how they like a taste of their own medicine! I do think that this trial is so important that every tactic should be used and pressed.

Expand full comment

Very good, Diane. I like the idea of naming a prison after him. I hope that NY State will rename the park which is stained by his name.

Expand full comment

Excellent article and sends message that there are options for follow-up if Trump is acquitted. Send to House Managers!

Expand full comment

Please do send this to the House impeachment managers. Fight fire with fire.

Expand full comment

Determination to act to achieve the objective and decisiveness and rigour in implementation now needed by Dems to follow this path...a little cold "steel" please for a change.

Expand full comment

EXCELLENT!! As one responder on this site suggested - send a copy to the House Managers! Thank You!!

Expand full comment

Definitely worth the time to read, thanks for sharing the link.

Expand full comment

Thank you for sharing this!

Expand full comment

Send it to House Impeachment Managers....

Expand full comment

Diane, I read your piece and, clearly, you were literally correct in saying that the senators are the jurors of the impeachment trial, I think, however, that the American people will provide the crucial verdict. If the trial has an early and strong impact on Americans’ unequivocal belief in Trump’s guilt, the vote of Republican senators may not be immovable. This is a trial of the Republican Party as well as Trump. As for the first vote taken by the senate it was not about whether impeachment of Trump, when out of office, is constitutional, rather, it was for whether to debate that before the trial begins instead of once it starts. This may seem a small point, but it is a point of law.

My main concern is that the trial is master class in the exposure of a tinpot’s effort and his Republican cohorts to overthrow our democracy. I am hoping it will be an engrossing tragedy with a happy ending for us.

Expand full comment

If you know a House impeachment mgr or rep send it along

Expand full comment

Cannot be helpful with your request.

Expand full comment

Just joined your Substack site. Thank you for clever clarity!

Expand full comment

Perhaps the “business and finance” Republicans will grasp that this is their last chance to wrest the party from the populist racist Republicans and allow themselves to be convinced of the obvious guilt. Look for early clues from Mitch M.

Expand full comment

They better. You can’t have a thriving business /economy without the rule of law. This is how Capitalism slides into fascism.

Expand full comment

One of the key messages that comes from Trump is that laws shouldn't constrain them but should only stop people getting in their way, bothering them or preventing them from doing their reverse Robin Hood routine with impunity.

Expand full comment

And it must be said that a lot of governments have collaborated in creating such a system around the world.

Expand full comment

Fascist Capitalism or Democratic Capitalism: Republican take your pick.

Expand full comment

Since day one of this series of Letters from an American, I have admired Heather's mad skills that include, but are not limited to, her ability to look at situations in both micro and macro focus. In this letter, she analyzes how a trump acquittal could/would affect things in 2022 and 2024. I find myself nodding agreement, even as I try to calm myself each time I read any variation of the word "acquit." Re the outcome of this trial, I LONG FOR SOME INSTANT GRATIFICATION!!! Ooops. That just slipped out. Ommmmm...

Expand full comment

My grandmother had a statement that perfectly fits with statements made by Republican senators: “my mind is made up stop trying to confuse me with facts”

Expand full comment

That reminds me of an expression my family used to utter in reference to a cantankerous great aunt: "Frequently wrong, but never in doubt!"

Expand full comment

"This document tries to rewrite what we all saw with our own eyes"

The emperor has NO clothes!

Expand full comment

As Groucho Marx once said in one his movies, "What are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?"

Expand full comment

What about Groucho and "society"...."I don't want to belong to a club that will accept me as a member"

Expand full comment

Thanks, John. I have been borrowing that sentiment in my head for weeks now, not knowing from whence it came.

Expand full comment

Carve it on Trumpsky's tombstone

Expand full comment

It was Chico Marx in the 1933 movie Duck Soup. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/07/31/believe-eyes/

Expand full comment

Chico took time off from seducing chorus girls? Who knew??

Expand full comment

Thanks.

Expand full comment

It would be interesting to take away paychecks and health insurance from the senators and see how fast they get us coronavirus stimulus. They don't care that we can't pay rent or bills or buy food. This is not political it's a matter of survival.

Expand full comment

I was struck by your comment last night that senators are not required to be present during the vote. I'm hoping at least 17 will not be present to vote against conviction, to give themselves some wiggle room. It will be interesting to watch.

Expand full comment

Impeachment Flu Strikes GOP Senators Before Vote

Expand full comment

Is there a vaccine?

Expand full comment

Hope not

Expand full comment

Stick a sharp needle in their apse and see what transpires.

Expand full comment

From reader Phil Barth:

If there are 50 Democrats and 25 Republicans present, 2/3 of 75 = 50 (Democrats)

Good idea from Steve Levin:

Maybe Trump could host a golf tournament for Republican senators during the vote?

Expand full comment

Who would cheat the most?

Expand full comment

C'mon Stuart, unless it's senators only, we know the answer.

Expand full comment

That is an interesting , important tid-bit. I'm picturing 17 Republicans not being to attend the vote for some urgent personal issue to publicly save party face.

Expand full comment

Does not being present change the % of votes/majority needed to convict? ( it’s been a long time since civics)

Expand full comment

Not the percent, but probably the number.

Expand full comment

Despite the long range precedent of the Impeachment Trial, I find I am more worried about the Republican state legislatures like Arizona and Michigan who are still trying to overturn the election and to punish or censure anyone not aligning with the Trumpites. The Impeachment trial is distracting us from the danger that may well have greater ramifications for the health or demise of democracy in the United States -- the Republican controlled state legislatures. Are these states still democracies? How many Trumpites will be coming to the U.S. House and Senate in 2022?

Expand full comment

I’m with you on that. These Republican state legislators are really out there.

Expand full comment