,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
I have a caveat I'd attach to this. I get the argument for a narrow focus. BUT. BUT. Trump and his enablers' obvious play, if the impeachment doesn't remove him, is to say "the impeachment failed so they're trying something else. The witch hunt continues."
Frontload the rebuttal
Frontload the rebuttal
Have Democrat leadership saying, loudly and often, that this proceeding is about Ukraine but that doesn't mean he's off the hook, that other potential crimes will be investigated and dealt with.
It's all well and good to say there will be time to go after his other crimes but if it is not said, loudly and repeatedly, that doing so is part of Plan A, it leaves open the rhetorical defense that Plan A failed so now it's Plan B, C, D, E...
This is part of how Donald Trump has survived politically in the mass of constant corruption scandals and crimes in broad daylight: the fact that the members of the public in the Mild Moderate Middle *keep hearing different crimes* makes it sound like a scattershot fishing trip.
Now, as a very wise woman on here said, you can't witthold ammo from a munitions factory. In one sense it doesn't matter what the Democrats do, they can't actually stop Trump and company from employing these defenses.
But they can blunt them a bit.
But they can blunt them a bit.
They shouldn't change their strategy for fear of what Trump will say.
But they should be messaging aggressively, knowing that if they don't he will step into the vacuum they leave and control how the story is framed.
But they should be messaging aggressively, knowing that if they don't he will step into the vacuum they leave and control how the story is framed.
