From the beginning of the impeachment trial, we real Americans have understood a few things. One, the numbers in the Senate simply aren't enough to convict and remove Trump from office. Two, Republicans would be in lockstep with Trump and his defense lawyers all the way because Mitch McConnell openly said they would be - despite their sworn oath to be impartial jurors. Three, no matter what Trump's lawyers said Republicans would be forced to go along, because two.
You might surmise that this dangerous course could lead to a new era in politics, and you'd be right. On Wednesday Trump attorney Alan Dershowitz argued that cheating in an election is perfectly okay if the cheater (the president) believes it's in the interests of his reelection. And the guise for that is saying it's in the public's interest.
"Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest. And mostly, you're right, your election is in the public interest. And if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected - in the public interest - that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment. Everybody has mixed motives and for there to be a constitutional impeachment based on mixed motives would permit almost any president to be impeached."
Obviously this is a gross perversion of acceptable motive in running for office (but a decade after Citizens United "mixed" our motives for us, it's hard to be surprised by the spectacle). Either way it didn't matter. Enthusiastic Republicans picked up their cue, rushing up to Chief Justice and Citizens United architect John Roberts one-by-one to ask questions pummeling the arguments of Democratic House managers. Late last night the one senator who could possibly make a difference on the vote to at least call witnesses and enlarge the reach of the trial, Lamar Alexander (R-TN), announced he would not be in favor, leaving Democrats almost certainly short of the votes needed and leading to Trump's preordained acquittal as soon as today.
If Trump is acquitted at this point in the saga, the capstone to the trial will be Dershowitz's comments. Scholars today and historians tomorrow, on both sides of the aisle, will obviously credit that moment.
So what are we left with here? Basically, we are left with state-sanctioned cheating as a normalized part of politics, presidential or otherwise. Just when you thought things couldn't be debased any further, we are left with a new normal in which it is perfectly okay to cheat in an election so long as you simply reach for the most convenient of excuses: "I thought it would help my chances." This means Trump can do it again, but now so can anyone else.
In the brief time my site has been online, I've collectively defined the last ten years of Republican obstructionism (Obama era) and Republican fealty (Trump era) as "American Politics 2.0." This week I believe we have entered 3.0. This new era, by the standard no one is above the law, must be defined by a government free of law because everyone is above it under the right circumstances. To pass on law and order in this case makes it possible to pass on law and order in any case. Put simply, American citizens are left without law enforcement of politicians depending on the scenario. And since we can't predict scenarios, logically this is open to any and all scenarios.
That makes the president an autocrat or a dictator. And it makes our claim to democracy laughable. We are now, as of Wednesday January 29, 2020, no longer a democracy.
The good news is this brings some clarity. Now that it is unequivocally clear Trump believes cheating is okay, we can assure ourselves of a few more things. One, Trump without a doubt cheated in 2016. Two, Trump is absolutely cheating right now (he certainly never stopped even after the House started investigating him). And three, cheating must be done by both sides ahead of November.
You read that right. Democrats must now cheat simply to be competitive.
If cheating is now a legitimate part of the process, a candidate must partake because that's the way nearly all people will play the game. Just like Citizens United. In fact this is worse because there is no alternative to cheating (a candidate can at least fight PAC money by only accepting $10-15 donations). Logically, to not cheat is equivalent to not meeting the filing deadline to run for office: in both instances, you're not even competing. You've disqualified yourself.
That being the case, Democratic candidates must now go down a path at least some of them detest. They must become cheaters. And since digital communication seems to make foreign interference attractive, I would recommend Dems look into that option. The best bet for them would probably be China. Since Trump is both a cheating expert and has a serious head start, the candidates must work overtime to catch up. They've got nine months.
We'll see how it all shakes out then.