Agreeing With Statists For The Wrong Reasons: Impeach Donald Trump

Agreeing With Statists For The Wrong Reasons: Impeach Donald Trump

Ever since Donald Trump became the Republican presidential nominee in 2016, there has been a concerted effort by the establishment to do whatever they can to stop him. Publicizing scandalous materials, weaponizing intelligence agencies, voting, marching, protesting, and political violence were all tried, and none managed to keep him from gaining the Presidency. As such, the focus of the leftist vanguard has shifted to impeachment as a means to remove Trump from office, regardless of the facts of the case. Though the Democratic Party leadership has sought to distance itself from such efforts thus far,[1,2] more ardent leftist activists are pushing the idea in growing numbers. Let us see why this strategy is likely to backfire in such a way that the federal government itself will be damaged, and thus why one should agree with statists for the wrong reasons.

The Attempt

Before they can impeach Trump, Democrats (and a few cuckservative Republicans[3,4]) will have to mobilize greater support, given that the most recent attempt to bring the measure to the Congressional floor was defeated by a 66–355 margin.[5] The effort to drum up support for impeachment will anger Trump’s base, bringing them to the polls in greater numbers than would otherwise occur in a mid-term election. In the American system of government, an incumbent president does not stand for re-election in singly even years. But if impeachment is to be the result of Democrats winning control of the House of Representatives in 2018, Trump can argue with merit that he actually is on the ballot, even if informally so. Later, attempting impeachment going into the 2020 election will be seen as redundant, as the electorate will wonder why the decision should not be left up to them. Should Trump win re-election, the same argument for the 2018 mid-term voter turnout would apply again in 2022, and an impeachment effort against a lame duck president after that will be viewed as wasteful and needlessly divisive. It is also worth mentioning that impeachment proceedings would occupy the news cycle in the legacy media to the exclusion of other important events. This could both allow the Trump administration a freer hand in performing unsightly but necessary tasks and provide more fodder for mobilizing Trump’s base against Fake News.

Throughout his presidential campaign and ensuing administration, Trump’s signature move in the political arena has been to do unto others as they have done unto him. He counterattacks anyone who attacks him and defends whoever defends him. However, there is much more that Trump could do with the powers of the Presidency, such as pardoning people to remove leverage that the investigation led by Robert Mueller may have, unilaterally declassifying information that would be damaging to the Cathedral, issuing sweeping executive orders, and firing executive branch officials who serve at the pleasure of the President. He seems to be taking a relatively passive approach, perhaps sensing that Mueller could interpret the aforementioned maneuvers as obstruction of justice. But if Trump were to be charged and impeached, he would have nothing to lose by engaging in such vigorous countermeasures. The result of this is likely to be a revelation of massive amounts of criminal activity by government agents at all levels in all agencies which are currently hidden behind a veil of secrecy. In other words, if Trump goes down, he can probably take half of D.C. with him.

The (Likely) Possibility of Failure

So far, there have been two impeachment proceedings against Presidents of the United States, both of which had significant political motivation and both of which failed to produce the two-thirds super-majority required by the Constitution to remove a President from office. House proceedings were initiated against Richard Nixon, but he resigned before the House voted to impeach him. Should impeachment proceedings against Trump proceed to a vote in the Senate, 67 Senators would be needed to remove him. There is no realistic possibility at this time for Democrats to gain enough Senate seats to remove Trump on their own, and damning evidence against Trump of a caliber not yet seen would be necessary to convince enough Republicans to both remove a president of their own party and defy the will of voters who sent a clear message in 2016.

Should impeachment fail, Democrats and the establishment press will emerge from the process looking weak and petty, and Trump will be able to parlay this into political capital to a greater extent than any past President would be capable. The end result is difficult to predict, as the political milieux of 1868 and 1999 were quite different from the Trump era, but Trump’s support is likely to be buoyed by a failed effort to remove him. Even so, this would further strain his relationship with Congress and the media, leading to more rule by executive orders, more interference from judges, and escalating rhetoric from the chattering classes.

As for the Democrats’ next strategy, an example following the Johnson impeachment may be instructive. Some citizens of Massachusetts submitted a petition to Congress in 1868 that called for a constitutional amendment to abolish the office of the Presidency and transfer its powers to a body composed either of members of Congress or “other competent citizens” chosen by Congress.[6] Following a failed impeachment of Trump, it is likely that some leftists will pursue this tactic, as some have already called for abolition of the entire Constitution in recent years.[7–10] These efforts may be agreed with for what leftists may consider to be the wrong reasons, especially if amplified to the point of abolishing the federal government to create many independent nations of the several states and territories. Should leftists succeed in removing what few undemocratic features remain in the American system, it should only hasten the collapse or Balkanization of the United States, and a dose of pure democracy beforehand should inoculate whatever new systems emerge against such foolhardiness for the foreseeable future.

The (Unlikely) Possibility of Success

To review, there is no direct precedent for this outcome and little reason at this point to believe it is a realistic possibility, but it must be discussed in the interest of thoroughness. Should Trump be removed, the Presidency would go to the current Vice President Mike Pence. Given his positions on various social and economic issues,[11–19] it is almost certain that those who impeached Trump would dislike a Pence presidency even more. Successfully removing a President for the first time in history would embolden the Democrats and establishment Republicans to try again, especially because Pence was elected with Trump and the Speaker of the House (a Democrat in this case) is third in the presidential line of succession.[20] Pence would require a majority in both houses of Congress to appoint a new Vice President,[21] and a Congress that had just impeached and removed Trump would presumably deny him this majority, thus making the Democratic Speaker of the House next in line.

For Congress to remove one President from office, let alone two in quick succession, would greatly diminish, if not work to delegitimize, the office of the Presidency. This may seem counterproductive in terms of weakening a powerful office that can be captured by outsiders to use against the establishment, but such actions would only reveal a paper tiger to be such. A Presidency thus weakened would signal an important truth to the American people: that they are governed by a faceless monstrosity unresponsive to their needs that they cannot bring to heel by placing a man of their choice behind the curtain. Eliminating ineffective democratic means of change is sometimes necessary to encourage effective anti-political solutions.

It goes without saying that Trump’s base would be enraged by his removal, but what becomes of that rage could end the American system of government. There is a significant minority of people who are generally pessimistic about improving their fortunes by using the tools provided by the system, with a great amount of logic and evidence to support their position. Trump offered them a glimmer of hope for meaningful change, and they decided to give democracy one last try. Having that small candle in the dark snuffed out by the establishment and/or a part of the electorate that is openly hostile to them could teach them the lesson that the democratic process no longer serves their interests, if it ever did in the first place. This is fertile ground for both libertarians and reactionaries, and a growth of anarcho-capitalist, localist, minarchist, and neoreactionary movements should follow.

However, the short-term prospects favor force over reason. One possibility is a military coup, either to take power for a select group of top brass or to bolster Trump (or Pence) by forcibly closing Congress and thwarting their efforts of impeachment and removal. Whether Trump or Pence would actively coordinate such a power grab or participate in such a plot if presented to them is an open question, but their supporters may back such an extreme measure. A coup in the United States would be violently resisted by all parts of the left as well as establishment conservatives, but that resistance is likely to fail due to discrepancy in the ability to use force. Recent polling on this option has received a consistent level of support (20–30 percent) similar to that in South American countries which have had military dictatorships in the past.[22,23] The resulting junta may resemble those which once ruled there, which is very bad news for those leading the leftist vanguard, especially if they cannot fly once dropped from aircraft. But after progressive leaders are physically removed, the United States could very well get its own version of the Chilean Miracle.

Another possibility is a guerrilla campaign waged against the political establishment. They may wage a civil war or terror campaign to put Trump back in power, violently suppress the left, secede parts of the United States as independent nations, or simply eliminate the entire federal government. This is less likely to be successful and more likely to result in a more authoritarian state, especially if the rebels expect a short fight that they can win without much effort. That said, victory for the Cathedral is not guaranteed. Whatever the outcome, the divisions within America would be deepened, hastening the collapse of the current system to the benefit of all who are not part of it or dependent on it.

Conclusion

It is unlikely that the establishment will succeed in removing Trump, and any attempt is likely to backfire as such. But even if they pick this battle and win it, they will almost certainly lose the war in the long run. Because this would damage the most powerful and dangerous state in human history, one should agree to impeach Trump for the wrong reasons even if one supports his agenda.

References:

  1. DeBonis, Mike (2017, Dec. 6). “House votes to kill Texas lawmaker’s Trump impeachment effort”. Washington Post.
  2. Martin, Jonathan; Burns, Alexander (2017, May 18). “Democratic Leaders Try to Slow Calls to Impeach Trump”. New York Times.
  3. Smilowitz, Elliot (2017, May 17). “First Republicans talk possibility of impeachment for Trump”. The Hill.
  4. Seipel, Brooke (2017, May 16). “McCain: Trump scandals reaching ‘Watergate size and scale’”. The Hill.
  5. “Final Vote Results For Roll Call 35”. Clerk of the United States House of Representatives. Jan. 19, 2018.
  6. “Memorial Regarding the Abolition of the Presidency”. National Archives Catalog. Center for Legislative Archives, National Archives and Records Administration.
  7. Gibson, C. Robert (2013, Mar. 4). “Abolish It: It’s Our Right”. Huffington Post.
  8. Copple, Roger (2013, June 25). “Why a New Constitution is Our Best Hope”. Dissident Voice.
  9. Day, Meagan; Sunkara, Bhaskar (2018, Aug. 9). “Think the Constitution Will Save Us? Think Again”. New York Times.
  10. “Abolish the Constitution”. Sydiot, Jan. 25, 2017.
  11. Kliff, Sarah (2011, Feb. 16). “Pence’s war on Planned Parenthood”. Politico.
  12. (2016, July 15). “Donald Trump’s Running Mate Has Some Truly Strange Views on Modern Science”. Fortune.
  13. Ring, Trudy (2015, Apr. 1). “Mike Pence ‘Abhors’ Discrimination? His Record Shows Otherwise”. The Advocate.
  14. Drabold, Will (2016, July 15). “Here’s What Mike Pence Said on LGBT Issues Over the Years”. Time.
  15. Yglesias, Matthew (2009, Feb. 25). “Mike Pence Calls for Massive Anti-Stimulus”. ThinkProgress.
  16. Sahadi, Jeanne (2016, July 15). “On Social Security, Trump and Pence couldn’t be more different”. CNN Money.
  17. Heinz, Katie (2015, Aug. 26). “As congressman, Gov. Pence co-sponsored change to birthright citizenship rules”. WRTV.
  18. Hirji, Zahra (2016, July 15). “Trump’s Choice of Pence Adds a Conservative Fossil Fuel Backer to GOP Ticket”. InsideClimate News.
  19. Carden, Dan (3016, Mar. 21). “Pence reinstates mandatory minimum prison terms for some drug crimes”. The Times of Northwest Indiana.
  20. Mount, Steve. “Constitutional Topic: Presidential Line of Succession”. ussconstitution.net.
  21. 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
  22. Feierhard, German; Lupu, Noam; Stokes, Susan (2018, Feb. 16). “A significant minority of Americans say they could support a military takeover of the U.S. government”. Washington Post.
  23. Bell, Brandon. “When Do High Levels of Corruption Justify a Military Coup?”. AmericasBarometer Insights 2012, number 79. Vanderbilt University.

<<The Myth of Tremendous Government: A Reply to Mark Christensen++++++++++++++The Rise and Fall of the Sturmabteilung>>