Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has issued the inevitable call to arms, urging the House to “initiate impeachment proceedings” against the president. Of course, we knew this was coming sooner or later. As Liberty Nation’s Tim Donner explained, Mueller “left a long trail of obstruction bread crumbs for the Dems to gobble up.”
The Massachusetts progressive and 2020 presidential hopeful followed the clearly marked trail and posted a four-part tweet explaining why, in her view, Trump should be impeached.
“The Mueller report lays out facts showing that a hostile foreign government attacked our 2016 election to help Donald Trump and Donald Trump welcomed that help,” she declared. “Once elected, Donald Trump obstructed the investigation into that attack.”
As LN's legal affairs editor Scott D. Cosenza, Esq. wrote: “Special counsel Mueller’s report gave a hostile Congress plenty of kindling with which to start a fire.” The report gave much attention to the ten points that Mueller said might be considered obstruction, depending on DOJ regulations – almost 20 pages worth for some of them. So it was inevitable that someone in Congress would take the bait and accuse the president outright of obstruction.
Impeachment
The interesting part is how she chose to spin Trump’s involvement – or lack thereof – in Russia’s interference. Rather than accusing the president directly of collusion – or, for that matter, an actual crime – Warren says that Russia interfered, claims it was on Trump’s behalf, and then wraps up by saying that Trump welcomed it. Read between the lines, and you see an unwillingness to accept that the president didn’t conspire with the Russians. Of course, like so many others, Warren has wanted to oust Trump all along.
The core of her argument may seem familiar if you’ve read Mueller’s report:
“Muller put the next step in the hands of Congress: ‘Congress has the authority to prohibit a President’s corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice.’ The correct process for exercising that authority is impeachment.”
And there you have it, a neat jump from the special counsel’s words to what everyone knew he meant. Mueller couldn’t have led her to this conclusion much more directly had he dictated Warren’s tweet to her in person – a trail of bread crumbs indeed!
Obstruction and Accountability
Shiva Ayyadurai
She goes on to explain that if we ignore these repeated efforts at obstruction, we’re telling Trump and all presidents to follow that they have no accountability. A bold statement for the blue-eyed blonde-haired white lady who was hired on as Harvard Law School’s first “woman of color” in 1995. She maintained the story of her Cherokee heritage but spurned the give of a DNA test from a political rival, Shiva Ayyadurai, who campaigned under the slogan: "Only a real Indian can defeat the fake Indian."
How is this any different? As Graham J. Noble explains, “when one resists being investigated for a crime one did not commit, that is not obstruction of justice.” There’s no justice there to obstruct. Warren, on the other hand, did benefit from being mislabeled as a woman of color. She wasn’t officially investigated for her dishonesty, of course, yet one might still think she would be wise enough to not be the first 2020 presidential hopeful to pick up the gauntlet dropped by Mueller.
Then again, she did finally take a DNA test. Fauxcahontas proudly waved her results around social media, defying anyone to question her heritage again – despite the fact that the revealed she was 1/1024 Native American. All things considered, perhaps wisdom isn’t her strongest attribute.
Will the House join in her folly and answer the call to impeach? The anti-Trumpers' chances of removing the president from office are slim to none -- but time will soon tell if they'll give it a shot anyway.
