The Five Leading GOP Excuses for Trump’s Behavior—and Why They’re All Bullshit
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Dozens of counter-narratives have emerged in recent months to defend Donald Trump against impeachment charges. A few of them deserve special attention, because unlike the counter-narrative that Trump’s call with the president of Ukraine was “perfect,” or that Trump withheld aid because he sincerely cares about corruption in Ukraine, or that this impeachment process is a “coup,” the most dangerous ones have an element of truth to them. Here are the five most pernicious.
1. Let’s take, for example, the idea that you can’t impeach a president if the economy is good. Here’s how Trumponomics author Stephen Moore put it on Fox Business : “Nancy Pelosi, I hope you're watching. You’re going to impeach a president that’s created the best economy in 35 years? Are you insane?”
This is a half-truth. The economy is good. What is unclear, however, is what that has to do with the constitutional responsibility of holding a president accountable for attempting to coerce a foreign leader into announcing an investigation into Joe Biden.
This narrative skirts the merits of impeachment, and instead attempts to change the subject to something more favorable. There’s also the implicitly cynical assertion here as well that suggests that voters, given superficial appeasement, don’t really care about being governed by a corrupt leader (and, in fact, will punish someone for holding him accountable).
2. Another counter-impeachment narrative that I’m hearing a lot lately is this: “It’ll tear the nation apart!” This one also has the benefit of skipping over the merits of impeachment, while imploring us to put the country first.
Again, though, it’s BS.
For one thing, it is brought to you by the same people who were happy to “burn it all down” and vote for Trump, because, after all, America was doomed, and this was the “Flight 93 election.” Today, for some reason, these same radicals are super-worried about preserving comity and stability. I don’t buy it.
Conservative writer Katie Pavlich even has the temerity to suggest that, by pursuing impeachment, Democrats are helping Russia sow discord .
Put aside the irony of blaming everyone but Trump for helping the Russians. The “It’ll tear this nation apart!” argument, which was even advanced by Tulsi Gabbard , fails to grapple with the fact that our political world is already crazy, and that impeachment hasn’t been much more exciting (or dangerous) than a normal day in Trump’s America.
There’s also this question: Did impeaching Bill Clinton in the late '90s—something that many of the same Republicans now begging us not to put the country through this stressful event supported at the time—wreak havoc on our nation? If so, I don’t remember it.
In the highly unlikely event that enough Republicans are persuaded to support removing Trump from office, threats of violence or a second “civil war ” should not deter them from their duty. The truth is this: Impeachment would only truly rip America apart if Donald Trump were to decide to burn it all down on his way out the door. I don’t think we can allow his threat to do such a thing prevent us from holding him accountable.
3. Here’s another one that popped up about a week ago: Sen. Ted Cruz is suggesting , parroting a line that came from the Trump White House and Rudy Giuliani, that publishing a few op-ed columns is the equivalent of foreign election “interference.”
If that’s the case, then Giuliani and others working with Ukrainian fringe characters are soliciting such interference in 2020—by their own standards.
4. Unlike Cruz’s narrative, the next one is at least based on a provable fact: “There’s an election coming soon.” OK, it’s an irrelevant fact, but a fact nonetheless.
In America, there is (thankfully) always an election coming soon. As far as I can tell, there’s nothing in the Constitution that says you can’t impeach during an election year (just as there’s nothing saying you can’t nominate or confirm a Supreme Court justice in an election year).
To be sure, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton both faced impeachment in their second term. Donald Trump is exceptional in that he has been quicker to commit obviously impeachable offenses. I’m just not sure that he should be rewarded with a “get out of jail free” card for that.
5. Lastly, and my personal favorite, is the notion that Trump is too inept or incompetent to shake down Ukraine. This one has the benefit of allowing the person advocating the theory to ding Trump, while still making an exculpatory case. One purveyor of this theory is Ben Shapiro, who argued that Trump was incapable of forming and sticking to a sinister plan, referring to his alternate view of the president as “Thought Vomit Trump.”
“I don’t actually see objectively that Trump has ever had the level of intent necessary to do anything,” Shapiro said . “I don’t think that he’s ever had the level of intent to put a—to eat a hamburger. I think that it’s half-accident when he eats a hamburger.”
Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations.
Why so many counter-narratives? Republicans can’t really defend Donald Trump on the merits, but they can engage in distractions and sophistry.
It matters little if their arguments are mutually exclusive (it was a “perfect call!” hardly jibes with “It was bad, but not impeachable”); what matters is that cult members have options from which to choose.
If you find yourself running out of lame excuses for defending Donald Trump, one of these five counter-narratives is sure to come in handy. Feel free to mix and match.
Excuse me for posting such a knowledgeable and thoughtful seed . It may not fit in with what some Trump supporters have been putting up lately. The writer is a conservative by the way.
Nothing you post has any relevance. It's all the same. I will never vote for a Dimocrat again.
The reality that Trump infuriates the left wing nut jobs means he is doing what's good for the USA.
More from the Daily beast?
Serious question. Is this left wing Fact checked as false rag one that you peruse often?
My question for Trump supporters is: "What does Democrats supposedly fighting to impeach this President from day 1, as many of his supporters have claimed, have to do with the Presidents proven actions? Did Democrats force the President to try and get Ukraine to publicly announce an investigation into his primary political rivals son and thus directly benefiting his own personal political gain? Did Democrats stop Trump from investigating all this corruption in Ukraine he claims he's so worried about back in 2017 when he took office? Or 2018? It appears he only made this request AFTER the early Fox News polls showing Biden beating him by double digits.
"Biden also performs best in hypothetical 2020 matchups. Among all registered voters, he leads Trump by 11 points (49-38 percent), up from a 7-point advantage in March." - 5/16/19
Trump's 2nd call to the Ukrainians, the one where he asks for a favor and directly mentions Joe Biden, occurred July 25, 2019, two months after the Fox poll. The first call to Ukraine doesn't mention anything about Biden or Burisma or even the 2016 supposed Ukrainian government coordinated election meddling conspiracy theory the Russians are trying to convince dimwits like Trump of. He gave a general likely scripted ask in the first call in April saying the US wanted to "implement reforms that strengthen democracy, increase prosperity, and root out corruption."
So first call in April, Trump follows the script and he's following State department developed foreign policy. Second call after he sees Biden beating him in hypothetical matchups and boom, he's withheld military aid July 3rd, likely just after the "plan" had been decided upon by Trump and his senior white house officials. It's no doubt what Bolton wasn't on board with which led to his leaving just a month and a half later when he realized none of them heeded his warnings and went ahead with an ill advised politically motivated operation using congressionally approved military funds to pressure the new President to capitulate with their plan. They didn't need him to start an investigation, they just needed him to announce it. Pure politics.
So April 21st call, no mention of Biden or 2016 conspiracy theories. May 16th Fox News hypothetical matchup poll showing Biden winning by 11 points. July 3rd aid is halted for no known reason, all State department folk were pushing for the aid to be released as soon as possible. When they ask why it's being held they are rebuffed and given no answer, simply that the President is blocking the funds. July 25th the President gives the mob boss like request of the Ukrainians, yeah, he knows they want the Javelins, but they need to do "us" a favor though. Trump has tried to claim the "us" proves it was for all America, and I'm sure in his warped mind, protecting him and getting him re-elected is in Americas interest. I've no doubt that's what many of his loyal sycophants believe thus the means justifies the ends in their minds.
And only then did the whistleblower blow the whistle and followed proper channels throughout which took another month and a half. During that time, aid was still not released. Then, just two days before the Ukrainian President was planning on going on CNN and making the public announcement, the whistleblower complaint became known to congress Sep 9th when the IG Atkinson reported to the house intelligence committee, and then, two days after that, on September 11th the aid was finally released.
How is that okay with anyone? Are we to just allow the President to use his position of power to secure his re-election, use the office to investigate rivals or enlist foreign allies to help him win an election? Is that the new political world we find ourselves in? Where just because the partisan lines have been drawn nothing this President does will shake their loyalty in him? Is he truly above the law now simply because his sycophants are holding him up on their outstretched hands refusing to hold him accountable for anything? I've seen bitter partisan politics before, we all have, but I think we've hit rock bottom now which we haven't seen in over 150 years. Personally, I don't hate any conservatives, religious or not. I accept them as fellow Americans and know they just want safe schools, safe streets, good jobs, clean air, clean water, a thriving economy, a strong military, a comprehensive immigration policy that doesn't demonize undocumented immigrants coupled with robust border enforcement, these are all things I think most people agree on. And I think deep down, they also share my belief that the President should not be above the law and should not be abusing his office for personal political gain. It's just sad to see so many appear to be compromising their consciences in order to keep supporting a politician they know they would never support if they had a (D) after their name.
Where is that one?
Oh....wait.....you were talking about this seed.....
Oh dear.
Sorry, all I read was entirely BS! Knowledge and thoughtfulness had nothing to do with it!
1. Straw man argument.
I'm pretty sure just about zero people have made the claim that the strong economy is related to anything having to do with the Ukranian phone call. What they are saying is that it's dumb to impeach a president who appears to be doing a good job.
2. “It’ll tear the nation apart!”
Actually, a lot of people say that, and it's not just Republicans. In 1998, Jerry Nadler, talking about impeaching Bill Clinton said,
In 2019, Nancy Pelosi said,
In 1998, at least five Democrats likened the impeachment to a "lynching."
That all sounds a lot like "it'll tear the nation apart" style rhetoric.
3. Is not an argument. So, was Cruz right or wrong? This is relevant because there has been all sorts of talk (and action, both public and private) responding to speech as "interference in an election." It's an incredibly broad and vague approach that endangers the 1st Amendment.
4. Oops! This one undercuts the principle argument supporting impeachment!
If it's irrelevant, then no one should care about the timing of Trump's call to Ukraine. I mean if there's always an election coming soon then there shouldn't be a bad time for the president to go investigating a political opponent. Right?
But I digress. Back to the argument . . .
Again, it's a bit of straw man, I think. I don't think too many people are saying you can't impeach someone during an election year. I do think people are saying it's either (1) unnecessary because of the pending election or (2) that it's actually being timed to influence the votes that will be cast in that election, and/or (3) that the impeachment is happening because Democrats believe they can't win defeat Trump in the election.
5. Well, this is an ongoing contradiction in Trump critics:
The Trump critics are continually saying that Trump is simultaneously the most incompetent president ever while also being the most brilliantly devious president ever. I mean he's either smart and competent or he's not. Pick one.
1. Straw man argument.
I'm pretty sure just about zero people have made the claim that the strong economy is related to anything having to do with the Ukranian phone call. What they are saying is that it's dumb to impeach a president who appears to be doing a good job.
Yet democrats had no problems at all using the strong economy and keeping it going as a reason not to impeach Clinton. If they can use the Its the economy stupid defense, so can we.Be consistent. 2. “It’ll tear the nation apart!”
Actually, a lot of people say that, and it's not just Republicans. In 1998, Jerry Nadler, talking about impeaching Bill Clinton said,
In 2019, Nancy Pelosi said,
In 1998, at least five Democrats likened the impeachment to a "lynching."
That all sounds a lot like "it'll tear the nation apart" style rhetoric.
It will tear the country apart. Democrats used that argument then so we will both use it now and will defend Trump to the max even if it does. We won’t abandon our President or sacrifice him on the alter of national unity. We will simply blame the left for deliberately with full malice of intent tearing the country apart. 3. Is not an argument. So, was Cruz right or wrong? This is relevant because there has been all sorts of talk (and action, both public and private) responding to speech as "interference in an election." It's an incredibly broad and vague approach that endangers the 1st Amendment.
Since when has the left ever cared about the 1st amendment except for itself? 4. Oops! This one undercuts the principle argument supporting impeachment!
If it's irrelevant, then no one should care about the timing of Trump's call to Ukraine. I mean if there's always an election coming soon then there shouldn't be a bad time for the president to go investigating a political opponent. Right?
But I digress. Back to the argument . . .
Again, it's a bit of straw man, I think. I don't think too many people are saying you can'timpeach someone during an election year. I do think people are saying it's either (1) unnecessary because of the pending election or (2) that it's actually being timed to influence the votes that will be cast in that election, and/or (3) that the impeachment is happening because Democrats believe they can't win defeat Trump in the election.
There was nothing wrong about the President and his call with the Ukraine President. There is an election in less than 11 months that democrats want to avoid at all costs.
5. Well, this is an ongoing contradiction in Trump critics:
The Trump critics are continually saying that Trump is simultaneously the most incompetent president ever while also being the most brilliantly devious president ever. I mean he's either smart and competent or he's not. Pick one. They want to continue to ague both sides against the middle here. The fact remains that there are absolutely zero reasons to impeach this President and the whole process has been illegitimate
To be fair, that's a bit of a chicken/egg situation.
I have never said he is brilliantly devious, and according to some Trump supporters here, I am the biggest Trump critic alive.
I think Trump is of average intelligence. He doesnt have any curiosity about things he doesnt know, and intelligent people usually do have that curiosity. Plus he has a very limited vocabulary, and intelligent people usually know a bunch of words. Plus he does dumb things like ask a foreign government to investigate a person who is running for his office in the next election.
I don't disagree with you there. So, I look at the never-ending demand for his tax returns (to take a more obvious and clear example) and the conjoined implication that those returns will reveal extensive criminal activity. And I think "how can people think such an ordinary person has managed hide all this criminality from the IRS, the SEC, and the DOJ for all these years?" It just doesn't work. He can't be Lex Luthor and Gomer Pyle.
Really? I think you are vastly OVER estimating him.
Donald Trump Brags About Groping Women
"You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the p**sy. You can do anything."
—In a 2005 interview with Access Hollywood’s Billy Bush
Donald Trump Smears Gold Star Mother
"His wife, she was standing there, she had nothing to say. She probably— maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say."
Trump Didn't Even Know What a Gold Star Family Is
"'You do know you just attacked a Gold Star family?' one adviser warned Trump.
Trump didn’t know what a Gold Star family was: 'What’s that?' he asked."
Trump Calls on Russia to Hack Clinton and Sabotage Election
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."
Trump: I know More About ISIS Than the Generals Do
"I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me...I would bomb the sh**t out of them."
—Nov. 13, 2015
Donald Trump Was Unaware Russia Had Already Invaded Ukraine
"[Vladimir Putin] is not going into Ukraine, OK, just so you understand. He’s not gonna go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down."
Trump Offers to Pay Legal Fees for Supporters Who Beat Up Protesters
"There may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience. If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. OK? Just knock the hell—I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees."
Donald Trump: 'Look at My African-American Over Here!'
"Look at my African-American over here!"
—At a campaign rally (June 3, 2016)
Trump Declares Hispanic Love With Tacos
"Happy Cinco de Mayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics!"
Donald Trump on Building a Wall
"I will build a great wall—and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me—and I'll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words."
What is your highest level of education, John?
Was Al Capone a genius? I doubt it. Criminals hire smart attorneys to manipulate their taxes and finances.
The IRS doesnt go after every white collar criminal, they never have. I thought everyone knew that.
In the fall of 2018 the New York Times proved Trump and his family violated inheritance tax laws. No action has been taken because the statute of limitations on those crimes has expired.
People get away with white collar crimes every day.
The last time my IQ was tested ( decades ago) it was 130. Talking to some of you may have made me dumber though.
As long as you dont PERFORM it everything will be ok.
And the best thing about it?
He's President and you....and Abuela or not.
What does that really say about dimocrats?
But how well educated are you?
"How did Capone rise to such heights? Eig doesn't credit the gangster's smarts -- Capone "was of average intelligence," with an IQ of 95. "But he had a real gift for organization," Eig says, "and he was a terrific people person, very gregarious, very well liked. This is not the popular image we have of him, but in fact he was a lot of fun to be around. I think that was really more the key to his success than his intellect." A crime boss and murderer who was fun to be around? Eig says Capone could be violent, but he used his charm to "build a fraternity around him.". "That's how he survived in this business," Eig says. "He really did try to keep the rival gangsters at peace. And of course when he couldn't, then he took care of business, and that's part of being a good businessman, too, when you're in Capone's racket."
Sounds an awful lot like someone we know... you could swap out the names and I think it would fit just fine.
"How did Trump rise to such heights? Eig doesn't credit the trust fund babies smarts -- Trump "was of average intelligence," with an IQ of 95. "But he had a real gift for organization," Eig says, "and he was a terrific people person, very gregarious, very well liked. This is not the popular image we have of him, but in fact he was a lot of fun to be around. I think that was really more the key to his success than his intellect." A real estate agent and adulterer accused of sexual assault by more than two dozen women who was fun to be around? Eig says Trump could be violent, but he used his charm to "build a fraternity around him.". "That's how he survived in this business," Eig says. "He really did try to keep the rival politicians at peace. And of course when he couldn't, then he took care of business, and that's part of being a good businessman, too, when you're in Trump's racket."
The only thing that doesn't quite match is the IQ, Capone was no doubt twice as smart as Trump since he had to make his money the hard way, not just handed $400 million from his daddy to start his businesses with. And the only businesses Capone ever bankrupted were ones he actually meant to put out of business.
It's not just Trump supporters.
You aren't either...
Since you aren't president either, whatever it says about democrats is the same as it says about you. Although I'm sure they can converse without 3rd grade insults, you apparently cannot.
That's the same thing as saying "you can't impeach during an election year",
What percentage of the people who vote in the election will have watched the impeachment or understand the issues? 30% 40%. I doubt it will be more than that. Saying the general public should judge whether or not Trump committed impeachable offenses borders on the absurd.
You might think so, but I definitely don't think that. If I thought he was really worthy of removal, I would say "impeach away!" even if it were October 2020.
That sounds like a very dangerous slippery slope. You could say that after every election, Congress could just set to work impeaching the new president because the dumb ignorant masses got it wrong again. Even if they don't always deserve it, we need to put some faith and trust in the American people. You might as well chuck our democracy in the garbage if you're not going to let the people decide certain issues.
OH the irony!
John didn't say a fucking thing about the Ukrainian phone call so YOUR comment is a strawman.
Secondly, you just conflated the Ukrainian phone call with Trump ' attempting to coerce a foreign leader into announcing an investigation into Joe Biden.' Something that the GOP and the 'conservatives' here insist are in no way connected.
Newt didn't think so.
Teddy is wrong.
Since we aren't talking about Americans, but Russian and/or Ukrainian interference, there is no connection to the 1st Amendment, is there?
Wrong.
Another strawman.
The issue with the call to Ukraine isn't the timing, it's the intent.
Secondly, Trump can 'go' and investigate whoever the fuck he wants, but he CANNOT use his office to control Congressionally authorized funding and he can't make demands on other countries for his OWN PERSONAL benefit.
Is your posit that devious equates to smart?
I don't think that incompetence and deviousness, no matter how brilliant, are mutually exclusive.
ya forgot one.
That should be the top damn one.
Followed by:
2) The Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump since before he took office.
3) Hating a President is not grounds for impeachment.
4) Trump has been more investigated than the last several Presidents; and they still don't have shit on him.
Brillianter !
2) is only true as a theme, not as actions. It was only prudent to consider eventual impeachment a possible fate of Trump's . Before he took office he was already a known liar crook bigot and moron. Yep, that was true before he took office. Before you voted for him.
3)True, which is probably why they waited three years until evidence of wrong doing was overwhelming.
4) he has shit all over himself.
That really was true of Hillary. And is made up shyt about Trump.
I like the way these four Trump supporters all did basically what the writer of the seed said impeachment opponents do wrong.
They are a great testimonial to the truth of the seed !
Just declaring that someone is "proving your point" doesn't make it so.
There is nothing about his behavior you could or would teach your children. I think some billionaire should print a book of nothing but Trump tweets and mail it to every Republican voter. Then send a billion copies to the schools so they can teach the children what not to do.
I agree. I think he's a pig and his business savvy - his wealth notwithstanding - doesn't impress me. None of that is grounds for impeachment, though.
Abuse of power & obstruction of Congress are!
Even if you think that, you still have to acknowledge that not liking him is not grounds. It's kind of a problem that no one will acknowledge it. They talk about it so much, it's hard to ignore it, so those of us who are skeptical look at that and see bias. That makes it kind of hard to take people seriously when they claim that charges of "abuse of power" or "obstruction of congress" are legitimate.
You can't just keep throwing shit at the wall and then claim the one thing that sticks is the thing you meant to put there all along. It's just not believable.
He belongs in the Oval Office because he is the duly elected president. Period.
What does he say and doing that upsets the left so much?
They say they are bothered by his personality, when in truth they don't agree with his common sense policies.
No real patriotic and decent American should vote for the far left Dems
Excuses from the TGOP for Trump's behavior?
In the 'cult of The Stormy Who' the excuse is the only reason for being.
Trump is so full of it he puts xmas turkeys to shame!