The game was over before it began. Maybe for a hot second, there was a wild card moment when it was reported that Sen. Mitch McConnell, who is furious with Trump, supported this latest impeachment push. He didn’t think it was politically motivated and wanted Trumpism purged from the party. You only do that by voting for conviction, right? This fetish to impeach Trump was hauled before the Senate again on charges even shoddier than Russian collusion or that Ukraine quid pro quo nonsense that we endured last year. It’s a pattern with the Left. Find something that you feel you can pin on Trump for an impeachment proceeding, which then leads the evidence not panning out. So, you go to find something else, another charge, which ends up being even more pathetic than the first attempt to boot a duly elected president.
In this second trial, Trump was impeached for exercising his First Amendment rights. That’s it. Democrats tried to blame him for stirring an armed insurrection against the United States. This happened on January 6 during the Save America rally which the now-former president addressed. It was the same day that Congress was certifying the 2020 election results. Protestors stormed the Capitol Building. It was a riot, yes—but an “armed insurrection”? No.
That’s where Michael Tracey, a liberal journalist, found to be a nauseating charge. It’s hyperbole to the nth degree. There’s no evidence that this was an armed insurrection. It’s egregious overreach, which is a perfect characterization of both impeachment efforts against Trump.
If it was an "armed insurrection," wouldn't you have expected arms to be brandished and/or discharged? Never appears to have happened, or at least no evidence was ever presented to that effect by impeachment managers— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 15, 2021
*Note, saying "a cop died" is not responsive to this point https://t.co/mwSSmGSsdz
The only shot fired on January 6 as far as anyone's aware was fatal one into Ashli Babbitt's throat. "Armed insurrection"? What a joke— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 15, 2021
One reason lots of people reject the authority of these self-proclaimed "fact-checking" entities is because they constantly dress up subjective political disputes as mere questions of "fact." As though it's somehow objective reality that "armed insurrection" is the correct term https://t.co/v2lCAEBQyy— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 16, 2021
Does anyone find it odd that there was supposedly a terrifying outbreak of "insurrection" 39 days ago but since then absolutely nothing "insurrectionary" has happened— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 15, 2021
There's such a deep, propagandistic attachment to the term "insurrection" because it implies ongoing, perpetual danger that requires aggressive state and corporate action to counter. Dem impeachment managers and likeminded fear-mongering pundits have been explicit about this— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 15, 2021
Generally "insurrection" implies (or used to imply) a collective protracted effort by hardened ideological actors to achieve their goal at great personal expense. The MAGA "insurrectionists" gave up and went home. But keep citing random historical events for melodramatic effect https://t.co/SX6muLFVOv— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 15, 2021
The most disturbing thing about this radically expanded definition of "harm" is that some portion of the people claiming to be "harmed" by anodyne utterances of words probably are being sincere -- their psyches really are that fragile. And they are attaining positions of power— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 15, 2021
“If it was an ‘armed insurrection,’ wouldn't you have expected arms to be brandished and/or discharged? Never appears to have happened, or at least no evidence was ever presented to that effect by impeachment managers,” he wrote. “The only shot fired on January 6 as far as anyone's aware was fatal one into Ashli Babbitt's throat. ‘Armed insurrection’? What a joke.”
Tracey elaborated further saying, “does anyone find it odd that there was supposedly a terrifying outbreak of ‘insurrection’ 39 days ago but since then absolutely nothing ‘insurrectionary’ has happened.”
“There's such a deep, propagandistic attachment to the term ‘insurrection’ because it implies ongoing, perpetual danger that requires aggressive state and corporate action to counter. Democratic impeachment managers and like-minded fear-mongering pundits have been explicit about this,” he added.
It’s commentary that has earned him unbridled hatred among the Left, though he himself is a hardcore liberal. He’s just not Trump-deranged. Trump’s legal team was interesting, to say the least with regards to some of their arguments, but the montage of Democrats using pretty much the same rhetoric Trump has used at his rallies was well-executed. Bill Maher also has a pretty grounded commentary during his show Real Time where he said that the folks who stormed the Capitol aren’t representative of the 74+ million who voted for Donald Trump. There’s a lot more nuance to this whole incident, especially when it comes to Ashli Babbitt.
This was a hail Mary attempt. That was made clearer with Rand Paul’s resolution about the constitutionality of this trial. All that vote count proved was that Democrats were way short of the 67 votes needed for conviction. The motion to bring witnesses in these proceedings was another embarrassing episode. Democrats were forced to back down after it was made clear the trial would be dragged out for days, maybe weeks. Republicans called their bluff. The Democratic plan of bashing Republicans for shooting down this motion was dead in the water. And now, they opened a pandora’s box regarding witnesses that could imperil the Biden agenda by wasting precious time in this 100-day period of his presidency. They backed down. Yes, another example of all talk, no action. It’s almost as if this whole effort was a total sham, right? And people wonder why nothing gets done in this town.
The impeachment effort was a sham. The trial was a circus. And the charges were a bogus exercise in overreaching that sets a dangerous precedent. How Dangerous? Well, if Republicans retake Congress in 2022, we should impeach Biden. I just don’t like him—and Democrats have now made that a legitimate impeachable offense for years to come.