By Matt Underwood Murphy: Trump ‘has committed 10 times more impeachable offenses’ in this term, and the sentiment is one of deep frustration. The idea that a president could rack up a multitude of offenses without facing serious consequences is a recurring theme. The perceived ineffectiveness of impeachment as a tool for accountability is a major point of contention, with many feeling it has become a mere formality, a hollow gesture that fails to remove a leader who is widely seen as unfit. The fact that the system seems unable to remove him is a stark illustration of the perceived shortcomings of the existing mechanisms.
This sentiment is tied to a broader concern about the erosion of norms and the rise of impunity. The feeling is that the rules don’t apply, that there are no consequences for actions that would land the average person in serious trouble, potentially even jail. This disparity fuels the frustration, as it creates a sense of unfairness and undermines the very foundations of a just society. It’s a sense of helplessness, a feeling that no matter how egregious the actions, there’s nothing that can be done to stop it.
The calls for “removal,” rather than just impeachment, speak to this sense of urgency and exasperation. People aren’t just looking for a symbolic rebuke; they want to see concrete action, a removal from office, and potentially, legal repercussions. The feeling is that the president’s actions are so grave, so damaging to the country, that anything less than full accountability is unacceptable. It’s a demand for real consequences, a cry for justice, and the restoration of a sense of order.
The comparison to past transgressions, such as the Clinton impeachment, serves to highlight the perceived gravity of the current situation. Where a president was impeached for something as relatively minor as lying about an affair, this term is filled with accusations of treason, corruption, and a complete disregard for the rule of law. This contrast further underscores the feeling that the current situation is unprecedented and that the existing mechanisms for dealing with such a crisis are inadequate.
The discussions about the perceived ineffectiveness of impeachment are often linked with a call for alternative solutions. This ranges from imagining a world where the legal system operates as intended, to considering more drastic, nonviolent measures like mass protests and coordinated acts of noncooperation. The suggestion that judges and prosecutors be legally obligated to perform their duties reflects a desire for a more robust and accountable legal system, one that’s impervious to political influence or inaction. This is a call for a fundamental change in the way the government functions.
The criticism of the media’s role in the situation is also evident. The perception is that the media, in some ways, has normalized the behavior of the president. There’s a feeling that the media has become accustomed to the daily barrage of controversies and scandals, and that it struggles to convey the seriousness of the situation. This leads to the concern that the public is desensitized to the gravity of the offenses, a situation that further exacerbates the problem.
The anger is directed not only at the president, but also at the Republican party. The party’s perceived silence and unwillingness to act against the president are seen as complicity, contributing to the feeling that nothing will change, and that the system itself is broken. This represents a deep disappointment and a sense of betrayal among those who believe the party should be upholding its own values.
The fear of political retaliation is prevalent, too. People are worried about the consequences of speaking out, of protesting, or of taking any kind of action that could be perceived as dissent. This fear fuels the frustration, making it seem impossible to make any headway. It also highlights the seriousness of the situation, as the president’s actions, and the lack of consequences for those actions, have created a climate of fear.
The proposed solutions, such as voting in massive numbers, or mass organized resistance, show a desire to reclaim the power that they feel has been lost. The call for the prosecution of this administration’s members, and the seizure of their assets, reflects a deep-seated anger and the wish to hold those responsible to account. The demand for fundamental change underscores the belief that the current political system is broken and in need of radical reform.
Finally, the discussion of the “Gish Gallop” style and “the Trump Trots” shows that the sheer volume of news, controversies, and scandals has created a sense of exhaustion and overwhelm. The fact that the president can engage in multiple offenses without any action is seen as a sign of his power, and the system’s failure. It is this combination of anger, frustration, and a sense of powerlessness that drives the calls for change, and the demand that something, finally, be done.