https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/us/politics/trump-impeachment-trial.html
"The president’s Democratic adversaries rolled out the biggest constitutional weapon they had and failed to defeat him, or even to force a full trial with witnesses testifying to the allegations against him. Now Mr. Trump, who has said that the Constitution “allows me to do whatever I want” and pushed so many boundaries that curtailed past presidents, has little reason to fear the legislative branch nor any inclination to reach out in conciliation."
I think the desire to make the Presidency a highly packaged deal, to penalize talking and free speech, enters into this case.
It is to the national advantage that the President "speaks softly and carries a big stick." This is clearly better than the wild variety of Donald Trump. However, that isn't and wasn't Mr. Donald Trump, a businessman and television personality among other things.
Thus, I think the New York Times is reading too much into this case rather than suggesting more clear reforms such as early elections, and campaign finance reform. Or a little more cut and dried expectations, perhaps directed at foreign relations.
Comments
Post a Comment