By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Several political analysts and former officials expressed concerns regarding Donald Trump and the Republican party’s actions and rhetoric. Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell warned of a Democratic majority and potential subpoenas, while others discussed Trump’s actions in Venezuela, suggesting it was unpopular and could lead to an illegal war. Trump’s low approval rating and handling of multiple scandals were also criticized. Finally, the changing nature of the Republican party, along with Trump’s perceived untouchability, was a key talking point.
Read the original article here
‘He’s got to go’: Jeffries on Hegseth’s ‘kill everybody’ order, predicts GOP won’t allow impeachment. The core issue revolves around the explosive allegation that a high-profile figure, let’s call him Hegseth, issued a “kill everybody” order. This is a very serious charge, likely implying the commission of war crimes and violations of international law, specifically the Geneva Convention.
Jeffries, the central figure in this scenario, acknowledges the gravity of the situation. He unequivocally states that Hegseth “has to go,” which indicates the severity of the alleged actions. The problem, as Jeffries sees it, is that he also predicts the Republicans will not allow impeachment. This is a political reality, unfortunately.
It’s tempting to delve into the question of how to get the Hague involved to arrest the accused for crimes against humanity. The fact is, regardless of the severity of the charges, Jeffries is predicting that any attempt to bring forth impeachment will be blocked by the opposing party. This, in essence, is a recognition of the current political environment, one where party lines often trump considerations of justice or the rule of law.
This prediction is met with a mixed reaction. Some people view Jeffries’ assessment as an accurate appraisal of the situation. They believe, given the history of Republican behavior, especially regarding the January 6th insurrection, that the GOP is unlikely to hold one of their own accountable, regardless of the charges. They point to the rule of law being meaningless to the GOP.
Others are deeply critical of Jeffries’ perspective, seeing it as capitulation and a lack of leadership. Their frustration is palpable, with many viewing this as an admission of powerlessness. They argue that regardless of the likely outcome, the Democrats should aggressively pursue impeachment, forcing the Republicans to take a public stand and explain their reasoning. The repeated calls for articles of impeachment are not just a suggestion but a demand for action, even if the end result is not a desired one.
The essence of the critique is that the Democrats, represented by Jeffries, are failing to confront the alleged misconduct head-on. There is a sense of hopelessness, a feeling that those in power do not care, and that nothing will be done. The critics also believe the Democrats are playing politics, prioritizing their own self-preservation over the pursuit of justice, particularly international law.
The debate also delves into the nature of the alleged wrongdoing. The “kill everybody” order is the crux of the issue, and that makes this an open-and-shut case. The intent, the way it’s described, and the actions themselves are what make this a serious offense. This isn’t a matter of simple negligence or a misspoken word. It is a potential war crime.
There is a sense that the current situation is not too dissimilar from prior incidents, such as drone strikes in places such as Afghanistan that killed civilians. It’s also important to note the double standard that the current political environment allows.
The overall sentiment is one of frustration and disillusionment. The people appear to be tired of politics-as-usual and are demanding action. They believe that even if impeachment fails, it’s essential to stand up and fight for justice, even if the odds are stacked against them. There is a clear divide in how to best respond.