Schwab: Republicans practice art of defending indefensible

How hard is it to see if a president commits crimes, undoing the election is why we have impeachment?

By Sid Schwab / Herald columnist

It’s predicted this will be a hell of a winter. The PUD is gearing up, we’re told, for more outages than usual, lasting longer. Maybe it’s time to buy a generator.

One thing is sure, though: If it hits as hard as expected, if we find ourselves suffering bone-chilling winds and frozen pipes, cars stuck in deep snow or spinning out on icy roads, we’ll see Trump supporters strutting in bathing suits and flip-flops, smelling like coconut oil, claiming it’s sunny and warm.

So here we go. Democrats have produced their articles of impeachment, enumerating, in plain language, abuses of “presidential” power and obstruction of Congress. Much more could have been included; Mueller’s report was replete. That improper actions occurred is as obvious as a snowdrift; likewise, that congressional Republicans will pretend it’s green grass and blue skies.

But they’re in a tough spot. Given the evidence, their only rational defense would be to agree Trump did those things but they don’t amount to impeachable offenses. That’d make more sense than choosing to assert nothing happened. It’d suggest residua of integrity, while not requiring their current Pythonesque denial. (You Tube: tinyurl.com/monty4u)

There’s a problem, though: They’d be saying they’re OK with a “president” — and, because they’re certainly not hypocrites, even a Democrat — unconstitutionally seeking election help from foreign countries, including those that undeniably wish us ill. And they’d be disavowing their oversight requirements, ceding to ANY president virtually unlimited power. Improbably, given the propagandophilia of their base, they seem to believe that’s an abridgement too far. Thus, the circus we saw at the impeachment hearings: screaming, insulting, ignoring, complaining about process.

The impeachment articles arrived right after the DOJ Inspector General’s report, about which the expected disemboguement of boilerplate rightwing agitprop commenced immediately. While finding inexcusable errors and omissions, the report dismantled Trumpic claims of FBI “spying” or unjustified, politically motivated investigations. Of course it did: Had intelligence agencies ignored possible wrongdoing at that level, it would have been malpractice.

Between the impeachment articles and the IG report, Republicans have a lot of dissembling to do. No worries: William Barr, full-time Trump defender, no-time Attorney General for Americans, is on it like white on Nazis. Fox “news” is doing its usual up-is-downism as if it was pre-scripted, and Trump’s rally-lies and language about it were deranged, even for him.

If they’re not good at America, congressional Republicans are peerless at distraction. Their tantrums at the hearings were low-aiming performance art. Claiming there was no “there” there, they resurrected Mueller-report-style, preemptive obfuscation. They should have been laughed off the dais: crime-us interruptus isn’t a crime; Trump, the embodiment of corruption, was only seeking to root it out, despite testimony that, knowing his base, all he wanted was the announcement of an investigation. Possibly because his conspiracy theories had already been debunked.

It was hard to watch. Did they think their attempts at parliamentary interruptions would accomplish anything? Were Trumpists who viewed it on Fox “news” impressed? Had Republicans any compelling arguments, there might have been better tactics. They didn’t, so there weren’t. Hatred of Trump, they claim. Attempts to undo an election. But how hard can it be to understand that if a “duly” “elected” “president” is found to have committed crimes, undoing the election is exactly why impeachment was codified? Doesn’t national interest require finding out? Unlike most Republicans, true conservatives get it. (American Conservative: tinyurl.com/2conserv)

So now it’s real. Will Republican senators, as FBI Director Wray just did, understand that their oath of office was to defend the Constitution, not a “president”? Will Trumpists acknowledge what’s at stake and relinquish Foxification long enough to decide for themselves? Take it seriously enough to read the articles of impeachment, which they didn’t with Mueller’s report, rather than accept Trump’s and Barr’s perversions? Would they apprehend the significance if they imagined the charges were against Hillary Clinton? Those who decry lack of bipartisanship ignore the unprecedented effectiveness of a 24/7 disinformation network and a ceaselessly lying “president,” and the fact that he prevented key witnesses from testifying. Truth was under siege.

Today’s extraordinarily vicious divisiveness is on Trump, whose rantings and invective toward Americans and institutions who don’t kowtow have created such toxicity that “patriot” militias are threatening harm to senators who vote to convict. Fainthearted Congressional Republicans won’t stand up unless forced by an awakening among their voters: namely, remembering the highest obligations of American citizenship. Discouragingly, that part is on them.

Email Sid Schwab at columnsid@gmail.com.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Friday, Sept. 12

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

An image taken from a website attack advertisement targeting Everett school board member Anna Marie Jackson Laurence. (laurenceletusdown.com)
Editorial: Attack ads an undeserved slander of school official

Ads against an Everett school board candidate are a false and unfair attack on a public servant.

The Buzz: What Charlie Kirk got right about our rights

Freedom of speech was just that to the conservative activist. He invited a sharing of perspectives. Here’s ours:

Schwab: Flattery gets one everything if you’re Putin or Trump

Putin puffed up Trump to get what he wanted; Trump has made puffery the coin of his realm.

Klein: Charlie Kirk lived for the right to argue; we all should

You don’t have to agree with any of his opinions to see the danger to all in his violent silencing.

Douthat: Why Charlie Kirk’s message resonated with young right

His was a different kind of campus conservatism, both rebellious, relaxed and approachable.

Comment: GOP seems intent on losing on health care concerns

Their rollback of Medicaid and attacks on vaccines are likely to cost them control of the House.

Comment: Are Democrats using the wrong words or the wrong ideas?

A liberal group’s memo to party officials on how to phrase their messages seems to miss the point.

Pedestrians using umbrellas, some Washingtonians use them, as they cross Colby Avenue under pouring rain on Tuesday, Nov. 28, 2017 in Everett, Wa. The forecast through Saturday is cloudy with rain through Saturday. (Andy Bronson / The Herald)
Editorial: Speed limit reductions a good start on safety

Everett is reducing speed limits for two streets; more should follow to save pedestrian lives.

Gov. Bob Ferguson and Rep. Rick Larsen talk during a listening session with with community leaders and families addressing the recent spending bill U.S. Congress enacted that cut Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funding by 20% on Thursday, Aug. 21, 2025 in Lynnwood, Washington. (Olivia Vanni / The Herald)
Editorial: Work to replace what was taken from those in need

The state and local communities will have to ensure food security after federal SNAP and other cuts.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, Sept. 11

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Comment: Florida’s vaccine mistake won’t say behind its border

It wants to end a mandate for school kids, risking the spread of disease. Other states are fighting back.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.