It's often said lately that the Republican party isn't operating on the same set of facts that the rest of us are operating on, an alternative reality if you will. Democrats and their supporters leap into that alternative reality as well in thinking that Republican Senators would ultimately convict the former president in his impeachment trial.
In the end, everyone was brought back to reality yesterday with a 57-43 vote in the Senate to acquit the former president, not withstanding minority leader Mitch McConnell's much-discussed speech on the floor immediately afterward.
In light of lead impeachment manager Representative Jamie Raskin's (D-MD) that in the court of public opinion and history the managers were successful, it still does come down to actions, votes and the record as described by NPR's Audie Cornish of "All Things Considered," in a less optimistic view of the Republicans moving on from Trumpism.
After the vote, Mr. McConnell denounced Mr. Trump's actions saying that he was directly responsible for what happened on January 6th despite voting to acquit him on 'dubious' constitutional grounds to use Mr. Raskin's words. Former Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) said that the speech was a clear mark in the start of the fight for the soul of the Republican party. This leaves the question of whether Mr. McConnell along with 7 senators and 11 House members is powerful enough to take that on and get the Republican party back to its roots.
Mr. Curbelo described the eighty-five percent of elected Republican officials as 'willing hostages' to Trumpism, which when he said it sounded a bit strange to this column. It seems like Republicans in the House at least are 'very willing' with 143 of them voting against impeachment so describing them as 'hostages' didn't quite fit. His point is understood that Republicans supported Mr. Trump out of party loyalty and backlash from the base, but are now free to move on. However, that's not the case at all and Ms. Cornish corrected the conversation saying that they are willing supporters, which is indeed the case.
Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said that with McConnell's vote to acquit, Republican would have never gotten to the required two-thirds of the Senate - Democrats needed McConnell. But as fmr. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) more astutely explained, there would never be enough Republican votes even if Mr. McConnell vote to impeach because it would weaken his position as minority leader, if not wipe out his leadership role. It's all he has left along with the knowledge that the vote to acquit will turn off huge spigots of donor cash. Seven-figure conservative donors and corporations have made it clear that they would cut off the campaign donations for those who voted to acquit, hence Mr. McConnell's speech, as also explained by Mrs. McCaskill. When explained with such clarity from one who has been on the short end of McConnell's political spear, you can see that this is classic Mitch McConnell, at his most shrewd.
"Time will tell," said Maryland governor Larry Hogan (R) as to whether traditional Republican principles will win over Trumpism in its caucus but his feeling is that the Republican party will be unable to win on a national or statewide level if it continues to embrace the cult of one person. In trying to 'disentangle' themselves (to use another one from Mr. Raskin) from their votes, traditional Republicans may succeed in the short term, but the bottom line is this:
History will only remember that the President of the United States incited a riot upon the Capitol and betrayed his oath of office by do nothing to stop it. Republican Senators still acquitted him of a crime against the United States.
This is the undeniable meteoric conclusion that will have a ripple effect lasting for decades the world over. (This hints toward a foreign policy discussion we're eager to start.) The adage goes that history will be the ultimate judge, but its already made its ruling.
Panel: Kasie Hunt, NBC News; Audie Cornish, NPR; Clair McCaskill, fmr. Senator (D-MO); Carlos Curbelo, fmr. Congressman (R-FL);
One more thing...
We didn't discuss the pandemic despite the appearance of the CDC Director Rochelle Walensky and as Mr. Todd noted, it had been a long time since the CDC Director was on the program. The short of it is that CDC guidance for schools if you listened is greatly dependent of the severity of the outbreak in each community. Yet, governors are lifting mask mandates, which Ms. Walensky advised against. Why? Because it begs the common sense question for these governors, which is how do you expect to open schools safely if your community spread is out of control?
And the silver lining... While the impeachment trial moved along and accompanying media coverage dominating the new cycles all this time, the Biden Administration under the radar has gotten a lot done in ramping up the government's response and is off to a great start.
No comments:
Post a Comment