Imagine That Little Chat

No Surprise

It was a shock, but no surprise. We have been cultivating Rule by Mob for decades. Incrementally, the extremists, the angry, hateful ones, have infiltrated our society and our government, first with a toe hold of buffoons in Congress, then with more zealots spouting patriotic sounding phrases, the true meanings of which are anything but patriotic. They puffed with each step of power grabbing, strutting like self-important peacocks. All they needed was a megalomaniac cult leader to manipulate and channel their rage.

We now have 140 representatives and forty-three senators* who are so broken, so beholden to their dear leader that they have made themselves shockingly blind to the obvious. The result is a disempowered Congress, an even greater public distrust in government and a giant step toward autocracy and fascism.

Because of Republican cowardice the January 6 assault on the Capitol, the insurrection, the sedition has now become a training exercise for more assaults, mob rule and the end of democracy. These cowards dishonored 245 years of patriots and patriotism.

And they did it on our watch.

Impeachment – the Trial

To be fair, Trump’s attorneys had no way to defend him with facts or with law, since all the facts and all the law were against him. They had nothing substantive to work with. That left them only distraction, disingenuous arguments about process that had already been settled, attempts at smearing Democrats and whataboutisms. So, with great passion and righteous indignation attorneys van der Veen, Schoen and Castor claimed what follows. See if you can identify the theme. Editorial comments are in italics.

A lot of Democrats didn’t like Trump.

Something about Antifa.

It was whataboutism. The political left was not on trial. Plus, Antifa is a political idea, not an organization. It’s like they blamed the insurrection on grumpy.

Congressional Democrats refused Trump due process.

This was said literally as attorney Schoen was defending Trump in the exact venue of his due process, precisely as proscribed in the Constitution.

Elizabeth Warren and some other Democrats used the word “fight.”

There was nothing offered to suggest that any of the Democrats’ use of the word “fight” had anything to do with themselves or with Trump inciting riot, violence, insurrection and sedition. Besides, the Democrats were not on trial. Trump was.

Some bad things happened at some BLM protests.

BLM was not on trial. Trump was.

Some Democrats objected to the counting of electoral college votes in 2017.

There have been times when Democrats have had questions about election integrity.

Jerry Nadler opposed the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

Trump has First Amendment rights that the House Managers sought to refuse him. Castor presented an in depth recitation of case law about freedom of speech.

The First Amendment does NOT protect Trump or anyone else from prosecution for incitement to riot. It is akin to the denial of freedom of speech to falsely yell “FIRE!” in a crowded theater. Castor’s argument had no applicability to the proceedings..

Democrats hate Trump.

The House Managers were intellectually dishonest.

Some Democrats have spoken of punching people and have joked about the death of opponents.

Some law professors and the House Managers were mean to Trump’s attorneys.

Righteous indignation was expressed with great energy.

Jamie Raskin is a hypocrite.

The House Managers manipulated information and tried to trick the jurors.

This is just a sampler of the things said by Trump’s attorneys. Have you spotted the theme?

There was exactly one count of impeachment against Trump: that he incited an insurrection that violated the Capitol Building, the Constitution, the Congress and killed a lot of people. That was the only thing in question.

So the theme of all of the defense counsels’ arguments is that nothing offered in Trump’s defense addressed this one and only question. Which is to say, Trump’s lawyers presented no defense whatsoever. Zip. Nada. Bupkis. All they brought were various forms of distraction, and tragically, treasonously, that was enough. In the Through the Looking Glass America of the past several decades, that has been the through line of Republican politics. It has resulted in minority rule.

In an effort to support the unity that President Biden seeks to bring to our country, I offer a positive response to these defense counsels. Rather than diminishing these fraudulent men and their pitiful, disingenuous presentation, let us embrace them in an appreciation of their thankless, impossible task and simply hope that they got a fat retainer from Trump up front. Otherwise, they’ll be just like most of Trump’s other attorneys: unintentionally pro-bono bozos.

The damage has been done. Now it’s up to us to figure out how to carry on with some version of democracy, how to sustain the republic bestowed upon us by the Founders. Come to think of it, imagine having a conversation with Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin or any of them. Imagine that you’re bringing them up to date on what we’ve done with the country they birthed at such great peril to themselves and with such great hope. Go ahead; imagine that little chat.


Just in case you’d like to do something about the aforementioned, here’s a list of the 17 Republican senators who voted to acquit Trump and who are up for re-election in 2022. Consider donating to their Democratic opponent who will hang that albatross around their necks.

Roy Blunt (R-MO)
John Boozman (R-AR)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
John Hoeven (R-ND)
Ron Johnson (R-WI)
John Kennedy (R-LA)
James Lankford (R-OK)
Mike Lee (R-UT)
Jerry Moran (R-KS)
Rand Paul (R-KY)
Rob Portman (R-OH)
Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Tim Scott (R-SC)
Richard Shelby (R-AL)
john Thune (R-SD)
Todd Young (R-IN)
Many thanks to MSA for the list.
* A question for the 140 representatives and the 43 senators: What was so personally valuable to you that you were willing to violate your oath, compromise your integrity and sell out your country?


Ed. note: We need to spread the word so that we make a critical difference, so,

  1. Did someone forward this to you? Welcome! Please subscribe and pass this along to three others, encouraging them to subscribe, too. (IT’S A FREEBIE!) Use the simple form above on the right.
  2. Engage in the Comments section below to help us all to be better informed.


The Fine Print:

  1. Writings quoted or linked from my posts reflect a point I want to make, at least in part. That does not mean that I endorse or agree with everything in such writings, so don’t bug me about it.
  2. Said John Maynard Keynes, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” So, educate me and all of us. That’s what the Comments section is for.
  3. Errors in fact, grammar, spelling and punctuation are all embarrassingly mine. Glad to have your corrections.
  4. Responsibility for the content of these posts is unequivocally, totally, unavoidably mine.


Copyright 2024 by Jack Altschuler
Reproduction and sharing are encouraged, providing proper attribution is given.

What do you think?

Your name and e-mail address are required, but your e-mail will not be disclosed.

Keep the conversation going by both adding your comments and by passing this along to three friends.
That´s how things get better.

2 Responses to Imagine That Little Chat
  1. Jim Altschuler Reply

    And what are we, the people, supposed to do to re-educate, re-train and redevelop morality in the rage-obsessed Trump supporters, white supremacists and maniacs bent on destroying our republic, our government and our way of life?

    I’m holding back some because name calling (fascist, Nazi, et al) is counterproductive even when true. I have serious concerns about roving bands of thugs and anarchists beating and perhaps killing anyone they feel is a good target for such treatment.

  2. Allan Shuman Reply

    On the one hand, the performances of Van der Veen and Schoen seemed theater of the absurd, had the outrageousness of their claims not been in mockery of so deadly serious a concern. Everything you said was accurate and on point. On the other hand, none of it mattered. The 43 knew that attorneys for the former President were constructing a web of lies worthy of their client. They might as well have found a tenor and sung Sweet Adeline in four-part disharmony as their defense. As long as the 43 (and especially the 17 whom you mention) saw their tickets to remain in power in the hands of Trumpoid constituents, nothing would have mattered. So the defense merely had to find something to do to fill their allotted time and space. There being no substantive defense, they paraded their indignation for as long as they could stretch it, which was only long enough to force most tuner-inners into choices among screaming at the TV, physically gagging, or looking for something to punch. Convulsive laughter was not available to me, because notwithstanding the absurdity of their arguments, the matter was too serious.