Posted on 11/17/2019 7:00:31 AM PST by ShackledNoMore
With the Trump impeachment drama in full swing, it is useful to look back into history to see how past impeachment activity can impact the future.
"We all know that the Republicans acted against their own interests when they impeached President Clinton in 1998, because this caused an electoral backlash against them in 1998. But what few realize is that the Democrats, too, at this time, acted against their own self-interests by their refusal to convict Clinton in the Senate, thereby preventing the accession of V.P. Al Gore and causing the election of the second President Bush in 2000."
More at link Above:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
"We all know that the Republicans acted against their own interests when they impeached President Clinton in 1998, because this caused an electoral backlash against them in 1998. But what few realize is that the Democrats, too, at this time, acted against their own self-interests by their refusal to convict Clinton in the Senate, thereby preventing the accession of V.P. Al Gore and causing the election of the second President Bush in 2000."
More at link Above:
It was a backlash because they pursued small stuff in lieu of the actual major crimes they all knew about but would not speak of publicly. Probably because some high-level Repubs might have gone down too.
It simply is not Satin's time yet.
Soon, but not yet.
1996 San Diego Republican National Convention. I remember the late Lyn Nofziger spoke and said that under that scenario if WE could not beat a SITTING president Al Gore we would have no business being in business.
First let’s be honest here and admit that President Clinton lied under oath.
He should have been removed from office.
So the Dems were too stupid to see which side of the bread had butter on it.
Next - Al Gore missed it by a whisker in 2000. If he had won Tennessee- his sort of home state- he would have won the election.
Finally, the Hand of God is in all of this (and everything that happens).
“We all know that the Republicans acted against their own interests when they impeached President Clinton in 1998, because this caused an electoral backlash against them in 1998. But what few realize is that the Democrats, too, at this time, acted against their own self-interests by their refusal to convict Clinton in the Senate, thereby preventing the accession of V.P. Al Gore and causing the election of the second President Bush in 2000.”
That is an assumption - that Gore ascending to the presidency of half of Clinton’s term, would have been followed by two elected terms for Gore - that (1) cannot be proven as inevitable and (2) cannot be proven as a even likely relsult.
Do I have this right? Is this just what he thinks is a clever way to encourage the wobbly GOP to stab us in the back and remove our President who has done nothing wrong? Slick willy committed multiple felonies. So he’s saying the Repubs should be smarter then the rats and go ahead and remove Trump? Well f him and I expect better from American Spectator.
It us Patriots against the world and the world is outnumbered because we have a secret weapon - DPGA (the Divine Providence of God Almighty AKA the grace and power of Christ).
I’m not sure how to take this article. It’s a blueprint for 9 years of Pence. Not sure if that was the author’s intent.
Hind sight being 20 20, history shows us it made no difference if Clinton remained in office or was removed and replaced with Gore.
Here’s what happened: Clinton 8 yrs, Bush 8 yrs, obama 8 yrs (all leftist swamptsers)
If Clinton were removed, here’s what could have happened: Clinton removed early, Gore 12 years, McCain or Romney or obama 8 years. (all leftist swamptsers)
What’s in place now, Trump, is the exact opposite of anything we’ve had or been offered. It’s why the rats are in such a frenzy, he’s a real American and the country is prospering, getting respect again, and everything else good America stands for.
We actually needed all those swamptsters for America to realize we need a change.
The intent is ambiguous perhaps purposely so. The timing is very suspect. If the motive is as I suspect the Author should be ashamed of himself. Impeachment is as serious as it gets and removing a President because of the opposition’s convenient interpretation of a phone call would be a travesty.
To coin a phrase, Mike Pence is no Al Gore. Don’t get me wrong, I like Pence. I would vote for him in the general if it came to that. But he has none of the charisma and none of the popularity that Al Gore had back in the 90’s.
Mike Pence would be a current version of Gerald Ford.
If, God forbid, it came to that.
gibsonguy wrote:
The intent is ambiguous perhaps purposely so. The timing is very suspect. If the motive is as I suspect the Author should be ashamed of himself. Impeachment is as serious as it gets and removing a President because of the opposition’s convenient interpretation of a phone call would be a travesty.
———————
Agreed. Opinion piece or ambiguously directional? Hard to say. Definitely can read it either way.
Trump could fast forward his agenda and could ‘turn over’ the WH and set him up for 10 years. I don’t think Pence is mean enough and you gotta be that way to deal with the crazies out there. Either that or some underlings cold do the dirty work but they’re too cowardly to stand up to the press.
It’s true. The defense of Clinton hurt them in the long run. Although W Bush was lousy, he was better than Gore or Kerry.
“Do I have this right? Is this just what he thinks is a clever way to encourage the wobbly GOP to stab us in the back and remove our President who has done nothing wrong?”
That’s my take on it - just another NeverTrumper trying to sway GOP Senators. The timing gives it away.
Note that he fails to consider another impeachment scenario, where the Republicans did just as he is (coyly) trying to propose here. That was 1974, and Nixon was driven out because the Republicans who could have protected him turned against him.
So what happened next: The Republicans got their asses whipped 3 months later in the Mid-Term election and then Gerald Ford (who, according to this claim, should have been unstoppable, and stayed in office until 1984) couldn’t even beat a peanut farmer in 1976 - and it nearly cost us the Cold War.
That is the HISTORY of what DID HAPPEN, it is not a ‘predication’ based on a couple of magazine articles, as this piece is.
Good analysis. What is always a factor is: Is it a Republican President or a Rat? With an R you get the ruin of the aftermath like Nixon with the D you end up it being a big win for the POTUS such is the advantage of having the entire MSM behind you. My first reflex was the author was a Never Trumper who thinks he is being clever. It’s cynical and it’s insulting.
I remember predicting to ALL of my friends, that Clinton would resign in the second half of his second term. It was an absolute no-brainer option for the Dems: give algore a couple of years in the White House, BEFORE the 2000 election, and he would be very likely to stay there for 10 years. My mistake was assuming Clinton would do ANYTHING, for any reason other than naked self interest, no matter how much it might benefit his party (or his family, or his country)...
“My first reflex was the author was a Never Trumper who thinks he is being clever. It’s cynical and it’s insulting.”
Agree, although I don’t know who this clown is. Also, note that we’re not his target audience, rather the Republicans in the Senate are. But even so, it’s more of a desperation ploy, as even squeamish Republican Senators can easily see through that.
Oh yea, one more thing - perhaps the reason that the Democrats stuck with Clinton during his impeachment was that Clinton was still very popular with the base (seriously, how can any Democrat NOT be impressed by him landing a near-teenage girl, at his age). Needless to say, Trump’s support is at least as solid.
And so the Democrats were staring at angering their base and risking a blowout if they did vote to remove Clinton...no different than today with Trump.
But, to go back to 1974, the Republicans thought they had a good play to get rid of Nixon, as his approval was in the 20s, and so his GOP approval was probably not over 60% (if that)...and yet the Republicans STILL got their heads handed to them, and that was right after Nixon’s blowout of McGovern (in 1972).
First let’s be honest here and admit that President Clinton lied under oath.”””
The Clintons—all of them-—and their entire machine have lied since they could form words & speech.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.