With the never-ending discussion of Trump’s actions and the desire by some to impeach him I find myself thinking about the most recent Presidential impeachment. In particular I have been thinking about August 20th 1998.

Mind you article of impeachment did not pass from the House until December of 1998, but in August of that year the currents were flowing fast and the prospect of putting the President on trial in the Senate loomed over everything. But August was a busy month in 1998 and world events did not take a pause while American politics descended into warfare. On August 7th 1998US Embassies were bombed in Kenya and Tanzania killing over 200 people and injuring more than 4000. Al-Qaeda, led by the terrorist Osama bin Laden, carried the deadly attacks proving the organization to be more than a run-of-the-mill terrorist association. On August 20th President Bill Clinton operating on actionable intelligence about bin Laden’s location, launched missile strikes into al-Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan in a attempt that failed by a few hours to remove the terrorist from game board.

What does this military action have to do with Clinton’s looming impeachment?

Also on August 20th 1998 Monica Lewinsky returned to court continuing her Gran Jury testimony. Unlike the Mueller investigation Ken Starr’s office leaked like the Titanic after it’s impact and from numerous secret sources, including Grand Jury testimony information spilled freely.

The missile strikes taking place on the same day that Lewinsky returned to the Grand Jury sparked endless accusations that Clinton had ordered the strike to push the political mess off the new cycle. My conservative friends, and full disclosure at the time I was still a registered Republican voter, asserted that it was simply beyond any credibility that the Intelligence and Lewinsky’s testimony were mere coincidence certain that Clinton had ordered military action for mere temporary political position. It was quite a few years later that the evidence, now declassified, verified that indeed such a coincidence had taken place.

What does this have to do with Trump?

For all his failings and personal issues Bill Clinton still behaved more or less as a typical President but the same cannot be said for Trump. One has to look at his abuse of ’emergency’ declarations and tariffs to see that this president dis not bound by convention. Should the House move to impeach Trump, something that couldn’t be pushed off the news with an outrageous tweet, I cannot be certain that this man would not launch a few missiles to distract but rather initiate something far more serious to take over the news cycle. With the GOPs abandonment of all pretenses of responsibility and principle in their defense of Trump even such a blatant abuse of powers I can’t honestly give them the good will to expect that this would provoke the conservatives to hold him in any measure of responsible.

I think it is very possible that starting an actual impeachment of Trump will cost real lives, it is imperative that every other option be explored before that trigger is pulled.

Today, June 4th, 27 years ago the Communist Government violently put a peaceful democratic student-led protest in Tiananmen Square. The official count of how many were killed places the number at an impossibly low figure of 300, counting soldiers, civilians, and ‘ruffians’ while Amenity International place the figure at 1,000 and for a brief time Chinese Red Cross puts the number at 2,600. What is clear is that overwhelming military force was used to disperse, suppress, and punish people desiring freedom.

Such is the brutalism of dictators and Juntas. We need to take a moment and remember those who died for freedom they deserved but never received and curse those who mistake sadism, brutality, and murder for strength.

Another three day weekend has come and gone and while it is pleasant to have the extended time away from our regular routines it is also a somber time to reflect on those men and women that died while in service to our nation.

It is important to remember that this is not simply death on the battlefield, or lives lost in wars, both wise and foolish conflicts, but the passing of people as that served their greater community. Some did lose their lives in the anger, heat, fear, and confusion of battle, some lost their lives in the miscalculation during energetic trainings, some lost their lives due to carelessness and accidents, and some lost their lives in a myriad other ways. It is a dangerous profession serving in the armed forces. During my brief time I the service and on my single deployment to the Western Pacific more than one service person aboard my ship lost their life.

More important than moments of silence, and contemplations on their service, is the duty and obligation laid upon us the civilian authority to ensure that their sacrifices are never wasted, never discounted, never expended for mere political position. We are the ultimate arbiters of our government and the Armed Forces are an expression of that government around the globe. When we vote, we are making a statement about what sort of government and its relationship to its service member. More importantly we make a different statement if we do not vote, abstaining from our duty to those serving under the colors on our behalf, and discounting their dangerous and vital mission. To not vote, to ignore the vital issues and persons of our political processes is to dismiss as unimportant the lives of everyone who stepped forward and risked everything for the chance to serve.

I hope you paid a moment to honor the service and sacrifice that has been made on your account and when an election rolls around I hope you remember that it is there, where you advance a person to use their best judgment on your behalf, that you participate to fulfill that obligation to those who no longer can.

With the surge in draconian abortion laws sweeping the nation as conservative forces see glimmers of victory with the current make-up of the Supreme Court I think it is instructive to look at two disparate statistics.

Mind you, this is not an exhaustive argument, the reason why I consider myself to pro-choice are legion and at the heart of that reasoning is the simple fact that people should be allowed to live as they wish, including getting elective medical procedures that they want.

Maternal Mortality:

NPR and Pro-Publica published a finding on maternal mortality in the United States. The shocking and horrifying figure is 26.4 deaths per 100,000. Out of every 100,000 pregnant women 26.4 die from complications due to that pregnancy. (Other industrialized nations have far lower rates ranging from 3.8 to 9.2 per 100,000.) To carry a pregnancy to term is a decision that risks your very life and certainly the instances where the state can compel you to risk your life should be held to be most stringent of standards and not merely to suit the whim of moralistic politicians.

An argument I have heard is that the state can compel women to not have abortions to ‘save a life.’ First off that presumes an embryo or fetus is the same as a person and that’s something I reject but even accepting that standard yields strange and vast powers for the state. For example could the state compel someone to donate a kidney to ‘save a life?’ However let’s put aside the idea of the state grabbing people and dragging them of to suffer unwanted medical procedures to save a stranger and look at another statistic.

In 2017 the FBI reported the national murder rate to be 5.3 murders 100,000 people. An argument I have often heard against nearly all forms of firearm regulation is that people have a right to self-defense and such regulations put people in danger from denying them the tools they may need to exercise that right of self-defense. Of course we are currently experiencing an epidemic of mass shootings as unbalanced people, nearly always men and far more often then not white men, cowardly murder unarmed people in schools, public places, and houses of worship, sure to ‘save a life’ these rights could be as trampled as cavalierly as a woman’s right to determine her own destiny. After all a pregnant woman faces a death that is five times as likely as random person is to be murdered.

Naturally these statistics are unlikely to cause anyone to change their minds on either abortion or firearm regulation, both issues transcend any sort of reasoned position and are more strongly held as a marker for group and individual identity. The core driving factors are for the most part quite simple, anything that ‘tramples’ a right ‘I’ want to exercise is tyranny and those that ‘trample’ the rights of others or right I do not wish or cannot exercise aren’t being trampled at all but the product of ‘rational’ restrictions. It is much more difficult to recognize the rights of other than it is to vigorously fight for your own.

The long awaited Muller Report is out and there is no doubt that it holds news that is of a concern to everyone. It is a relief that the investigation did not find that Trump or his campaign actively coordinated with a hostile foreign power to win the presidency. Make now mistake Trump in my opinion is by far the worse president in the modern age and perhaps ever in our history but we should be grateful that he not an asset or agent though he is a weakness that our enemies exploit.

Due to the diligent investigation we know a number of things as fact.

Russian efforts to manipulate the election were not confined to just he general campaign but also worked to push forward Trump candidacy during the GOP primary. For the Kremlin Trump was the preferred candidate.

Russia launched a sweeping, expensive, and targeted operation to manipulate the election in Trumps favor. This was no passing fancy aimed at simply sowing confusion or tainting a possible Clinton administration, though it would have had that effect had Trump lost so from a Russian perspective it was nearly a win either way.

Trump, though he lied about and attempted to keep it secret, extensively sought to build a massive tower in Moscow. The Trump Tower Moscow project required positive assent and cooperation from Putin and his circle of criminals, assistance that the Trump organization and family courted and pled for.

Trump personal, familial, and company financial exposure in the Moscow project is, because of hidden tax information, unknown which means Trump vulnerability to manipulation through his finances at the hands of the Russian is also unknown.

It is likely that the Russians wanted Trump in office not because of some grand ‘Manchurian Candidate’ style conspiracy but simply because due to Trump susceptibility to flattery and greed makes him particularly vulnerable to skilled manipulation.

At no time during the primary, though he leap to the lead with the electorate, was Trump the preferred candidate if the Republican establishment. These disturbing facts and shadowy connection to Russian oligarchs and criminals were as evident to them as it were to everyone else who cared to look and when Trump won the Presidency the GOP could have still acted as a patriotic party. I am not suggesting that the GOP should have abandoned their core goals of tax cuts and massive deregulation, though I do not agree with those aims. With President Trump the GOP could have their license to pollute and their deficit exploding tax cuts of more than one and half trillion dollars without surrendering so much of the administration to Trump. They could have held the line against grossly unqualified cabinet secretaries, they could have held the line against ignoring the Russian operation attacking our democracy, they could have kept true to the country while pursuing their ill-conceived and self-serving goals, but they did not. Terrified of the base that they created with decades of hyperbole and divisive campaigning, a base that embraced Trump the moment he arrived upon the scene, they folded, cowered from the monster of their own creation, and surrendered all their honor in exchanged for thirty pieces of silver. I only hope that their destruction and reconstruction takes place before it is too late for my beloved nation.

Perhaps what I read was a terribly April Fool’s jest but given the history that is an outcome I find highly improbable. I generally spend some of my mornings doing political reading, news and opinion pieces from left and right to get a sense what may but on the active discussions and minds of political actors. This morning I read a piece by Rod Dreher titled ‘The Little Steps In Between.’ Quoting from a non-fiction book ‘They Thought They Were Free: The Germans 1933 – 1945.’ a survey of ten German citizen that lived through the rise and fall of Nazi Germany and published in 1955. The long quote pulled recounts how the decent into a murderous hate filled ideology did not happen suddenly but in gradual steps, bit by bit the people were brought along until it was far too late.

If you are familiar with Dreher’s work you undoubtedly see the twist coming to the foundations of his argument. Dreher is not speaking about the corruption of the conservative movement, a movement that professes a devotion to morality, often an explicit Christiane morality, a movement that professes a commitment to the value of each individual, a movement that professes a commitment to the notion of Truth, and yet this same movement has in steps accepted and embraced bigotry, lies, and torture. This is not the gradual steps towards Nazi’s that concerns Dreher but rather the ‘intolerable’ condition that public institutions are no longer allowed to engage in bigotry under the cover of ‘personal religious convictions,’ a fiction used the justify bigotry in the nation throughout its history. No the United States is not being submerged into hatred ideology by the rise of the alt-right, by openly white supremacist representatives, or a bigoted president that praises a gather of neo-Nazis as containing ‘very fine people,’ but rather by the mild insistence that public institutions are not allowed to discriminate.

To be clear I think that there is a clear difference between individuals and institutions, particularly public institutions that exist and gain tangible benefits from legal structures that derive from our common governments. A company or a corporation exist because we created the legal framework for them and they confer protections to the individuals that band together to create them, such as shielding personal assets from corporate misdeeds. Companies and corporation are not their owners and should not have the same rights and privileges as persons. Oh course the Christian Right has been hypocritical on this point. I recall quite clearly when California’s Prop 8, seeking enshrine in state constitution a legal definition of marriage as one man one woman, was fought in the public sphere and the Christian Right objected to boycotts of businesses whose owners had donated to the campaign to pass the amendment. They argued that private political actions and personal beliefs had no connection to their businesses and such linkages were unjust. Now that they have lost both the political and cultural battle over marriage they argue the exact opposite, that a business such as a hobby shop or bakery are extensions of their owners’ personal beliefs and sacrosanct under their personal religious freedom.

No Dreher is of course terrified if equality, engaging in the perpetual Christian Right fantasy of modern martyrdom. Like Jordan Petersen and his delusion of the ‘Murderous Equity Doctrine’ there is no end to the right playing themselves as the victim which not only makes them look ridiculous, encourages violence from their unbalanced members, but also robs them of genuine sympathy when their rights are under assault.