Socialist Republicans Today No Different Today Than They Were In The 1860s

      I just read a headline last evening that said “McConnell lays out Trump Impeachment Trial Timeline…” Now I may be a bit dense but my understanding of what the Constitution said about impeachment was that you had to try a sitting president (that means one still in office) for “high crimes and misdemeanors” and that once the president became a private citizen he could no longer be impeached. But of course, that was back in the day when Congress at least tried to pretend that they followed the Constitution. Now all such foolish restraint has been tossed aside and the socialist Republicans have no problem identifying with the hard left Democrats that they always claim they are opposed to. So, we can assume that Mr. Trump will now be subject to routine bouts of impeachment for the rest of his natural life–and beyond.

      The real reason for this impeachment is so they can pass an impeachment resolution that stipulates that he can never again run for any political office. Truth be told, they are still scared to death of what Mr. Trump might do a few years down the road and they want to deprive him of any chance to do it–whatever it is.

      I suppose if Trump’s son, Don Jr., were to decide to run for president in 2024 Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, would pass a resolution impeaching Don Jr. even before he occupied any office whatever. But they will try yet again to impeach Trump, not because he really broke any law, but because they have the power to do whatever they want, and they want to make sure the foes of their deep state bosses never have another chance to assume any office that will damage the deep state in any way. Now that the operatives of the deep state in both parties have the power, they plan on never giving it up again. When the Chinese Communist troops get around to occupying the country even, they will have to get permission from the deep state to do whatever they want to do because the deep state controls their leaders too. You think that won’t happen? Want to bet your life savings on it?

      Andrew Johnson’s impeachment in the late 1860s was made up of the same type of flimsy material that today’s Trump impeachments are–smoke and wind signifying nothing. In his book Impeached author David O. Stewart made some interesting observations. Stewart is an establishment historian, yet even for that, his book contains some interesting comments about Johnson and his impeachment. He noted, on page 75, that “…Congress was daily receiving petitions that demanded Johnson’s removal from office. The petitions, the fruits of an organized campaign, were signed by as few as three citizens or as many as three hundred. They poured in throughout 1867, mostly from the Midwest”

      Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens had been pushing something called the Tenure of Office Act which was to become the centerpiece of the impeachment charges against Johnson. Stewart tells us: “Under the legislation, the Senate would have to concur in the firing of any executive official whose appointment the Senate had confirmed in the first place..The Framers in 1787 required Senate confirmation of presidential appointees, but the charter was silent about who could remove those officials.” The thing they went after Johnson for was his demanding the resignation of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton who Johnson didn’t trust–and with good reason.

      Johnson vetoed the Act, which naturally was overridden by the radical Congress and so it became law. It is interesting that this Act was only passed shortly before the impeachment and up until that time there was no law preventing a president from firing someone in his cabinet. You have to wonder if this was passed in order to keep Stanton in office. He was, after all, one of those reputed by researchers to have had connections to the Lincoln assassination. What other possible connections to that event may have been then sitting in Congress? If I recall some of my research on the Lincoln assassination there were some. At any rate Congress was going to make sure Stanton’s “six was covered.”

      On page 112 Stewart also observed: “Fired by Stevens, the group resolved not to abandon the cause. They would bring up impeachment again and again and again. As a Republican remembered their strategy, ‘the closest watch would be kept upon every action of the President, and if an apparent justifying cause could be found the project of his removal would be vigorously renewed.”

      Does any of this sound familiar to you? How different is this from what the Democrat/Republican political machine is doing in our day? I submit their ain’t much difference. Back then we had socialists that ran the Republican Party. Today it’s socialists that run both the Republican and Democratic parties. But is their really much difference? Only difference is that they are going after a man who is now a private citizen and not a sitting president. But that’s no problem for them. The slight matter of it being against the law bothers them not at all. When you have a president in office that gained that office by questionable means and a vice-president who is not constitutionally eligible to hold her office, what difference does the law make? It’s just an inconvenience to be ignored–unless you or I break it and then, Katy bar the door! Our two–tiered system of justice will not allow for that–they can–we can’t! Simple as that!