I Was Naive

Rachel

I watched the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC last night.  I watch her a lot, she has great insights into what’s going on politically, and she has access to the most significant guests.  Last night it was Chuck Schumer, the man in the center of the current political storm.  

Rachel is a storyteller.  Listening to her takes some getting used to; she might take ten or fifteen minutes to get to the meat of her story.  There’s always lots of background and history; and often a “wow, how did that little thing become this big thing” moment.  So I watch Rachel.   I watch so much, that one of my “ground rules” for writing these essays is to not let Rachel drive this narrative. She’s so good; I’m not interesting in competing.  Also, many of “Trump World’s” followers watch Rachel as well.  No one needs reruns.

A Long, Long Time Ago

But Rachel made a strong point last night, on the way to her big story on the President’s Impeachment.  As she often does, she got me thinking.

I was naïve.  It was a long, long time ago in our current post speed of light political era.  It was last September, three months ago.  It seems an ancient story now.

I was naïve, as the outlines of the President’s actions in Ukraine became apparent in those first few weeks.  We first heard hints of the story:  hints of the Whistleblower’s Report, of our President asking for “a favor” from the President of Ukraine.  As the story emerged, we heard that that there was a mob-like “offer you can’t refuse” request made on a phone call in July. 

The arguments then were about what was actually on the table.  Even the President’s supporters, Fox News commentators, Senator Lindsey Graham and others, noted that if there was an actual “quid pro quo; give me this and I’ll give you that,” the President was in “real trouble”.

The Transcript

So when the President himself released the “redacted transcript” of his July 25^th call, it sure seemed like a confession to a crime.  And when we found out that the call was not just a “stand alone” action, but part of an overall plot that started with Rudy Giuliani back in March or even before, it made the criminality even clearer.  

The President of the United States committed extortion, a form of bribery.  He asked the President of another nation, Ukraine, to start an investigation into Trump’s anticipated political opponent in 2020, Joe Biden.  He offered a “bribe:” a White House meeting, and, as we later learned, hundreds of million of dollars of military aid.  It was aid and recognition that Ukraine desperately needed as the beleaguered country faced negotiations with Russia.

Repeating The Past

The announcement of an “investigation” alone would achieve what Trump needed to do.  In 2016, the Trump campaign could count on the fact that Hillary Clinton had a higher negative image than even Trump did.  It was an election of who was disliked more, of which voters were willing to “hold their nose” as they cast their ballot.   

Trump acts on “his gut,” and that gut was telling him that Joe Biden was the Democrat who would emerge as the nominee.  Biden had a much lower negative image than the President did.  Trump needed to “bring Biden down,” to make him more Hillary-like.  Then the Trump Campaign could replicate the “magic” of 2016, winning the Electoral College even if the popular vote went to his opponent.

So if the shining “new guy” in Ukraine, the anti-corruption candidate and a former TV star, just like Trump, newly elected President Zelenskiy, would open an investigation into Biden and his son, it would solve the “negatives” problem.  The Trump Campaign could spend millions of dollars on media, flashing black and white images of Biden, his son, and stacks of money.  They just needed the go-ahead, the announced investigation.

The Facts

Those are the facts that emerged as the leaves changed color in October.  And then the President went outside with the helicopters and reporters, and just said it.  Ukraine, he said, should investigate Biden.  So should China.  He wasn’t joking, “tweaking” the media as his allies claim.  He was committing crimes in broad daylight, and daring Congress to do something about it.  This even after we knew that “… Russia if you’re listening, find Hillary’s emails” triggered Russian attacks on the Clinton computers.

Then Trump “doubled down” again, sending his Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, to the press podium in the White House, to ADMIT TO THE CRIME, and tell the press, and the world, to “…get over it”.

Naivety

I was naïve, back then in the fall.  I thought that Americans, looking plain truth in the face, would realize that Trump had to go.  I thought that Congressmen, and Senators, would solve the equation given to them by the House Intelligence Committee: two plus two equals four.  

But they didn’t.  They found every excuse, obstruction, and obfuscation to hide behind.  They willingly defended Donald Trump over the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.  Then even compared the suffering of Trump to that of Jesus Christ.  

They say that Trump is “King” of the Republican Party.   I scoffed at that, but I was mistaken.  I just listened to Congressman Van Drew of New Jersey switch parties from Democrat to Republican.  He sat at the “right hand” of Trump, and literally pledged his “undying loyalty”.  He just needed to take a knee, and kiss the ring, and the image would have been complete.

I was naïve.  I thought better of our elected leaders.  I thought they would choose the Constitution over their political loyalty.  

I was wrong.