,
14 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
A brilliantly made point: “if House Democrats [believe the GOP] is so corrupt [that] it isn’t even worth trying to uphold their constitutional responsibility to impeach a lawless president, then they need to acknowledge the radical implications.” nymag.com/intelligencer/…
I've talked of congressional Democrats as "norms preservers" before, and that's a phenomenon that really needs picking apart right now.
It's true that we have norms of bipartisan cooperation — of attempting to keep up at least a façade of civility in politics. Great.
But if members of Congress give those norms precedence over the rule of law, then they can't claim they're 'preserving' much of anything.
But if members of Congress give those norms precedence over the rule of law, then they can't claim they're 'preserving' much of anything.
Let's run through the civic catechism, shall we? We're a nation of laws. We live under the rule of law. A core article of faith is that America delivers equal justice under law.
If members of Congress lay those principles aside because upholding them seems too hard—or because to do so might upset distant notions of bipartisan fellowship—then they're choosing to preserve norms at the expense of the laws that, so we're told, govern all of us.
That's not how this is supposed to work. That's not how any of this is supposed to work.
As I've said before: we can have a rule of law in this country, or we can have a culture of elite impunity. But we can't have both.
Sooner or later, congressional Democrats are going to have to choose.
Sooner or later, congressional Democrats are going to have to choose.
Also good on this point, @ThePlumLineGS: “The question isn’t whether [an impeachment inquiry] carries ‘worth’ for Democrats; it’s whether Trump’s misconduct demands an impeachment inquiry on the merits.” washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
@ThePlumLineGS Exactly right. 👇🏾
Let’s hold two thoughts at once:
1) For some in Congress (and the country), this is a matter of principle—i.e., of upholding the rule of law;
2) In a time of asymmetric polarization, most political questions _by necessity_ devolve into partisan politics.
1) For some in Congress (and the country), this is a matter of principle—i.e., of upholding the rule of law;
2) In a time of asymmetric polarization, most political questions _by necessity_ devolve into partisan politics.
Welp. nyti.ms/2Ztw43l
I'm afraid this analogy is right. The Trump administration isn't raising legal concerns or requesting time for compliance in good faith — instead, it's pulling out all the stops to obstruct, into perpetuity if need be. talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-a…
The term "massive resistance," if you don't know it, came to be thanks to America's heritage of white supremacy: naacpldf.org/ldf-celebrates…
And as held true at the state level in the years after Brown v. Board, the Trump administration — while resisting the rule of law — has gained control of the means of interpreting and enforcing it. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
