America’s Diminished Place In The World And The Consequences Of Not Impeaching

America’s Diminished Place In The World And The Consequences Of Not Impeaching from the forfeiting-the-future dept It has long been clear: Trump needs to be removed from office before he can inflict even more damage than he already has. But he doesn’t just need to be stopped; for America to have a future he also needs to be repudiated. Impeachment speaks to each need, to both make clear his behavior is beyond anything we would ever tolerate as well as remove his capacity to continue it. But by not even attempting to impeach him, or any of his malign administration officials, he not only remains able to wreak more destruction but he now does it with Congress’s blessing. Instead of being repudiated, his behavior is endorsed. Because one could fairly conclude that if anyone in Congress had an issue with what Trump is doing, then surely they would try to do something to stop it with the power they have. Yet, with the so far sole exception of Representative Green, who has actually tried, twice, to file impeachment articles against Trump, no one—from any party—has filed any against anyone. Obviously many in Congress do in fact object to what Trump does—there are tweets and speeches saying as much. But it’s all sound and fury signifying nothing. Tweets and speeches do not amount to any sort of useful action. And through inaction the only message we’re sending is that no one thinks it is worth doing anything more. A stunned and increasingly wounded world is now coming to terms with the realization that Trump’s disqualifying misbehavior is the sort of thing can happen in America, and moreover, the sort of thing that will be allowed to happen in America. His abuse of power—as well as his warmongering, war criming, corruption, ignorance, incompetence, racism, and range of other unconstitutional, illegal, and even criminal activities—is apparently something not just possible under our constitutional order but enabled. As we watch an addled monster drive us all towards disaster, with the rest of the U.S. government willingly along for the ride and no one with the constitutional authority even trying to apply the brakes, one is left to conclude that, at best, our vaunted Constitution must not provide an effective immune system to address Trump’s antidemocratic malfeasance, or, worse, that Americans are fine with all of it, because, even if there were a mechanism to stop him, there’s apparently no one with the authority to trigger it who thinks it’s worth bothering with. Both conclusions paint a very different picture of what sort of country the United States is than most had previously imagined, and it is this re-envisioning of America that will affect how others let the country and its people live in the wider world even after Trump is finally gone. Of course, there is actually an immune system. The fundamental power to remove Trump from office—impeachment—is still there, as provided by the Constitution; the issue is that no one is willing to use it. And that unwillingness is ultimately what the world is judging, because when they wonder why no one is using it, it’s impossible to avoid concluding that no one else in the government of the United States of America, despite everything Trump is doing, thinks there’s actually a problem to address. Perhaps this conclusion is unfair, though, so let’s take a moment to consider whether there could be any sort justification for Congress’s inaction. And, more specifically, the Democratic members of Congress, because while it’s an indefensible abdication of their own oath of office for Republican members of Congress to refuse to police Trump, because in theory he’s their guy, it’s something else for the political opposition to also refuse to, especially when he’s supposedly not their guy at all. Perhaps that opposition may begin to explain the reluctance to take action: for better or worse, Trump was duly elected President and in general it is a good thing if democratic expressions of political will are respected, even, and especially, by those who disagree with them. As Trump himself illustrates, de-legitimizing election results is not healthy for a sustainable democracy. There may also be the pragmatic concern that taking aim at someone the people chose is bad politics, because it will antagonize the electorate so that they never vote for you, although recent polls and election results strongly suggest that this fear is unfounded. Furthermore, Trump never should have been on the ballot in the first place. As an ineligible insurrectionist he never was someone that Americans should have been able to choose to be President, and that he was nevertheless voted into office already means his reign is inherently illegitimate, and in a way that undermines our democracy more than if its legitimacy were challenged. But even setting his eligibility doubts aside, it’s one thing to acknowledge Trump as the legitimately-elected President. But it’s another entirely to allow him, as President, more power than the office actually grants him and shrug off the unconstitutional ways he abuses it. The Constitution only grants him so much, and no one has the right to grant him more by failing to check him when he has nevertheless taken it. Perhaps some of the reluctance to press for impeachment is out of the concern that, terrible president or no, Congress still has a job to do to run the country, and bad things can happen if it turns its attention away. But this sort of mis-prioritization can’t withstand scrutiny either. For one thing, bad things are already happening by not acting to stop Trump. And not just all the bad things he’s doing, but all the bad things that Congress is doing too, like not passing ACA subsidies, or spending its time instead doing antidemocratic things like trying to pass First Amendment-violating legislation to censor the Internet, as if this moment of looming autocracy were a good time to join in on the constitutional violations too. Perhaps the reticence to pursue impeachment is motivated by the desire to remain cordial with colleagues across the aisle, in the hopes that it could lead to mutually-negotiated solutions. If so, however, it doesn’t seem like such politesse is paying off particularly well—after all, those ACA subsidies still haven’t been passed, and Trump remains in office, doing things that hurt Americans, including the constituents of both Democrats and Republicans, along with the rest of the world and our standing in it. While it is true that there have been some small successes managing to restrain Trump here and there using more traditional political pressure, at best such efforts are like trying to drain the ocean with a teaspoon, one issue at a time, while meanwhile a deluge of chaos drowns us all. Congress has still left us all defenseless to danger that by not even trying to do what it would take to stop it. And even if the concern about bringing impeachment now is that it wouldn’t have the votes to pass, it would still be bad math. First, by not pressing impeachment it prevents the political calculus from evolving so that there could come to be enough votes—no one needs to join the push for it if there’s no push happening. And it makes it doubtful that there would ever be enough votes, not even after midterms—assuming, of course, that an unchecked Trump doesn’t do something to interfere with them happening. If Congress is waiting for voters to send them more colleagues who will join them in impeaching, voters will need to know that there is an impeachment effort to be joined. Yet so far there is none. Not impeaching sends the signal that impeachment isn’t warranted, and if it isn’t warranted by now, there’s little reason for anyone to think that those already not bothering to try are ever going to change their mind and start. Ultimately, no matter what members of Congress tell themselves to try to justify why they have acquiesced to Trump instead of playing the best card the Constitution gave them to stop him, all of those excuses ultimately fall flat. Trump is destroying America, but by refusing to use the tools the Constitution gave them to stop him, it is Congress that is finishing it off for good. Not just by letting him wreck everything we’ve built for 250 years, and the lives and liberties—as well as global and economic stability—that depended on the Constitution’s promise being fulfilled. But by doing nothing it instead sends the very loud message, now reverberating around the globe, that everything he and his subordinates are doing is fine, when the reality is anything but. And the world is noticing. When they look at America they see it not as a strong, stalwart ally, but a frail country with weak civic institutions vulnerable to capture, indifferent to such a fate as long as it doesn’t affect the price of eggs, and possibly not even then. Worse, as Congress refuses to defend America from the exigent danger Trump represents to it and the world, and through its inaction instead enable it, the world is left to conclude that Trump is what America wants, because no one governing it is saying otherwise. Without a sign that America does not want Trump, other countries are forced to presume it does and act accordingly, even when doing so is bad for themselves and the future—and even us. Not only does it mean they can’t support us in our effort to rid ourselves of him, because there is no effort to support, but in the absence of any official pushback they have little choice but to accept him as legitimate, even though doing so only reinforces the power he is abusing and makes reclaiming America from his lawless grasp that much harder to eventually effect. Yet there seems to be this naïve belief held by many of the same cowered members of Congress currently doing nothing that somehow the problem will magically resolve, and once Trump is somehow eventually out of office America will simply be welcomed back to the world stage as a respected member of the global order. As if all we need to do is wait for his chaotic storm to pass and then we can all pick up where we left off. And as if the world will simply forgive and forget the real and often irreparable harm Trump has been inflicting, far beyond America’s borders, and that America has been refusing to even try to lift a finger to stop. The world will not. Failing to impeach, among all its other infirmities, is a long-term foreign policy problem. Without impeachment, to not just dislodge Trump from office so he can no longer hurt us anymore but unequivocally condemn the harm he has already inflicted, and not just on ourselves, we will be resented, and rightly so. Not for what Trump has himself done, but for what we have been glad to let him do to us all. Filed Under: congress, donald trump, impeachment, reputation Comments on “America’s Diminished Place In The World And The Consequences Of Not Impeaching” I never thought I would be in this position I am not an American but all of my life it’s been pretty much taken for granted by both me and everyone around me that the US is a benign force for good in the world. Not that everything has always worked out as well as it might have, of course, but we’ve generally accepted that if the USA is doing (or not doing) something, then there’s probably a good reason for it. This applies to everything from drug approvals to, I suppose, declarations of war. No more, though. I no longer believe that the USA has the best interests of the wider world (let alone Americans themselves) at heart when they act. And this should be a real ignominy and embarassment for everyone involved. I still don’t see how Donald Trump was elected once, let alone for a second time. Are Americans really that illiterate and unenlightened? On the available evidence, apparently so. Re: I dunno, man, that’s a hell of a thing to say after Vietnam and Iraq. Yes, Trump is the worst and most destructive president yet. But it’s not like he came out of nowhere. This has been building for over fifty years. There were signs. I make no excuses for my countrymen who thought putting Trump back into office was a swell idea. But it seems like they’re hardly the only ones who’ve had trouble drawing obvious conclusions from ample historical evidence. Re: Re: I wouldn’t vote for a career prosecutor for president either. Re: Re: The original intent of the Vietnam war was to attempt to bottle up the Soviet Union and prevent the spread of their ideology/interest through South Asia. If the Viet Cong succeeded it could lead to the collapse of other democratic governments in that area. Iraq was intended to prevent the development and use of “weapons of mass destruction”. Both of those are examples of stuff that started out with some semblance of good intentions. Neither worked out well, of course, but that part came later on. Sadly, Iraq ultimately ended up worse off than it was originally and Vietnam was just an overall fiasco with great losses of life. Since nobody has a crystal ball, I still credit the USA with at least a modicum of good intentions in both cases. Today, though, not so much. Re: Re: Re: Holy fuck no. Dubya had no good intentions. He started a useless war knowing full well that there was no reliable intelligence indicating Hussein had any WMD capabilities. And the US had armed Iraq against Iran in the 80s, so we already knew a lot on top of current intelligence and satellite footage and human intel sources. Have you not read the news since 2002? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction Re: Re: Re: Neither Vietnam nor Iraq was started with good intentions. You’ve been lied to by American propaganda. Re: Re: Re: I can’t accept that bombing people to suppress ideas comes from “good intentions”. Particularly how much value the U.S. claim to support ideological freedom. There aren’t enough seats eligible for change in the Senate for a 2/3 conviction in the midterm elections. From a utilitarian perspective, it would just invite more retaliation from Trump. Re: From a utilitarian perspective, it would just invite more retaliation from Trump. This is true, sad as this sounds. Electing Trump once was a mistake. Electing him again was a choice. And even once Trump is gone, there is absolutely no sign from anyone that America won’t make the same choice over and over again. Hell, looking at his probable successors, Vance and Johnson, I fully expect things to get worse. As it stands, it looks like the only hope for the rest of us is that they double down on the isolationist “America First” policies and continue to slide the country into economic, political, cultural, and militarial irrelevance. The rest of the world is already looking to move on without you. Re: I think you’re worrying a bit too much here. Trump was elected on the back of the inflation-driven anti-incumbent wave that destroyed multiple incumbent governments in elections around that time period, on top of Biden’s advanced age, Harris having a limited time to establish herself in the public sphere as the Democrat candidate and her refusal to form a clean break from herself and Biden – rightly or wrongly, people perceived Biden as having not done nearly enough on inflation and cost of living issues. Trump has done literally nothing to deal with affordability issues, if anything he’s only made things worse, and the electorate have noticed that in a big way. The other thing to keep in mind that Trump has a cultural foothold few other people have, and a bizarre “charisma” that draws a specific type of voter that normally doesn’t turn out for elections. When he’s not on the ballot, the Republicans tend to do horribly (and they’re already doing really badly in special elections). Trump literally can’t run again, all of his potential successors have the charisma of a dead fish (the very idea of JD Vance running as the GOP nominee is hilarious, he has no fucking chance in hell), and Trump in his second term is now so unpopular already that anyone associated with his administration will have him as an albatross around their necks. I’m not exaggerating when I say that 2028 may end up being a shoe-in for the Democrats – even the worst viable candidate would trounce anyone the Republicans might nominate. Hell, it might be the best possible opportunity for someone like AOC to take a shot at it. And that’s not even getting into how much the Democrats can do if they have the senate alongside a Dem president post-2028, which would likely mean the death of the filibuster, establishing DC as a state, major voting reforms that Biden couldn’t pass because of Manchin and Sinema, Medicare-For-All (or even just a public option), etc. Re: Re: "Worrying a bit too much"? From the outside, it sure do be looking to me like you lot are worrying way, way less than you should be. Not a single brownshirt killed to date, that I’m aware of. In the gun-and-death-worshipping nation that has spent the better part of a century shouting about how they saved everyone from fascism and how no one else did a damn thing in comparison. How many of you are they going to be allowed to kill, maim, deport, stuff in concentration camps, or all of the above, before you wake up to what needs doing? Dems could completely steamroll the repugnants in the next election, and it wouldn’t matter much. The US has now repeatedly demonstrated it’s broadly fine with fascism and paedophilia in highest office. No one with half a brain expects that to magically change over night. Given the long, steady decline of US public education, one catastrofuck of a President could maybe be swept under the (extremely large) rug, if I were feeling incredibly generous, but this time they knew full well what they were voting for – still they chose the orange Halfwit King. The US currently represents a national-security threat to quite literally everyone, and that leaves governments with no choice but to plan accordingly. Pax Americana is no more. Thank your repbulican neighbours. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it. this post is... …a prime example of serious TDS. And I am not a Trump fan, but Kamala was worse Re: Your comment is a prime example of the fact that TDS is a term used by sycophantic bootlickers who pretend like being legitimately concerned about the destructive narcissistic malicious machinations of a child-raping greedy corrupt president of a large country with global influence and nuclear weapons is “derangement.” Derangement would be like thinking immigrants were eating dogs or committing massive amounts of voter fraud without any evidence. This phrase always precedes absolute bullshit and lies. Re: Don’t lie. We can tell you are a Trump fan. Anyone who uses “TDS” in a way not to mock it is absolutely a Trump fan. The Difficulty Iv seen Tends to be HOW to get rid of ALL the Idiots in state and federal gov. Running petitions is getting harder and harder, as they have Specific rules to do so. And most time they only hit the Metro area’s. Even heard about a state congress ignoring petitions. I love comments I see, that deny Socialism, but dont give an alternative, as the USA seems to be Some sort of Communalist or Capitalist Combo. Its an internal battle of Corps trying to control Rich persons incharge. And its working. I like asking others, Which they like best, Socialism or Corps controlling everything. Problem is they dont know the difference. All they have been told is Socialism is Bad. It does seem a little premature to blame Democrats for not trying to impeach when they don’t have enough votes to succeed. At least let them win the midterms first. Because then you can reprint this exact article in December and it will be 100% spot on. And don’t get me wrong, I’m 100% sure Democrats won’t move to impeach even if they win a majority, but until they have a majority, they also have a pretty good excuse for waiting. Not that they should, but if they’re guaranteed to fail (because no Republican is jumping ship) then, well, they have a point. Re: 👆 This right here. https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/16/americas-diminished-place-in-the-world-and-the-consequences-of-not-impeaching/#comment-5180853 https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/16/americas-diminished-place-in-the-world-and-the-consequences-of-not-impeaching/#comment-5181032 These two comments are good points. If they have a majority, then impeachment can be considered. America does not have the stomach to deal with the deliberate malfeasance as it should be dealt with. Republicans should be ostracized into the same inhospitable land as Nazis once were, but even if Democrats gain control of the government, they won’t do a damn thing to actually ensure this never happens again. America is already lost. People are just sticking around for the credits now. Well, there’s your blind spot. The article manages to ignore the role of money in politics, and of wealth inequality as the driving force behind the destruction of democracy. American democracy is practically dead. Research has shown that the will of the average voter is powerless against the funds of rich donors. Citizens United put the final nail in the coffin. After that, it was just a matter of time for a wrecking ball like Trump to turn up. He is a symptom, not the disease. Poor people don’t care for democracy, because it has served them badly. Rich people don’t care for democracy, because it (or what remains of it) hinders them in extracting even more wealth. Do not hope for impeachment or any other procedure to save you. The balance of power has shifted too far to the side of money. For what it’s worth, the Democrats probably will impeach after the midterms, especially if they regain control of the senate. But right now it’ll likely not even get a floor vote. That’s pretty much the reason why they haven’t tried impeaching Trump a third time. The Jan 6th impeachment got the most senate votes for conviction in history, but possibly not as many as could be because McConnell punted the whole thing until the new congress when Trump was out of office anyway, making it easier for Republicans to justify voting for acquittal. Unfortunately, the vote threshold to convict was set up at a time when many of the founding fathers had active disdain for the concept of political parties and the idea of today’s hyper-partisanship was virtually unthinkable. The only time when it was really possible was during Nixon’s tenure, only for him to resign willingly and get pardoned by his successor. Fox News was literally established in response to Watergate, by political operators who wanted to make sure that another Republican president would never be brought down in the same way again. The US constitution and systems of government need major reforms. It would be difficult to enact, but trying and failing is better than not trying at all.