Pragmatism and a cool sense of judgment beats knee-jerk, hyper-partisan response. And thank Heaven that Jamie Raskin hasn't lost sight of the wider implications.
That said, it remains totallly curious that the GOP wants the Democrats to do their work for them. They hate their lunatics.
And I don't get why they've lost control over the crazies in the House and Senate. The likes of O'Neill, Baker and yes, LBJ, would have strong armed these idiots into submission from the start.
The current so called "leadership" in Congress is anything but.
If, say, a member of Congress committed an aggravated assault upon another, in Congress, with Congressional witnesses, would you want them to wait until conviction to act?
Comments
Pragmatism and a cool sense of judgment beats knee-jerk, hyper-partisan response. And thank Heaven that Jamie Raskin hasn't lost sight of the wider implications.
That said, it remains totallly curious that the GOP wants the Democrats to do their work for them. They hate their lunatics.
The current so called "leadership" in Congress is anything but.
If, say, a member of Congress committed an aggravated assault upon another, in Congress, with Congressional witnesses, would you want them to wait until conviction to act?
Suppose, using your example, you witness an aggravated assault, but you didn't know what provoked it?
Sometimes, taking time and getting it right is better.
FWIW Preston Brooks was convicted in D.C. but served no jail time, while a House censure motion failed ...