Doppel-Doof.

Als GWB 2003 in den Irak eimarschierte, hatte er derartig dreist über die Kriegsgründe gelogen, daß man ernsthaft überlegte wie man den Präsidenten impeachen lassen könnte.

Müßte das nicht irgendwie möglich sein, nachdem man den Vorgänger über Monate mit einem Impeachmentverfahren durch die Mangel gedreht hatte, weil er, die Fakten etwas großzügiger auslegend, behauptete nicht mit einer Frau Sex gehabt zu haben, obwohl sie an ihm Fellatio ausführte?

Waren diese juristischen Spitzfindigkeiten über das FREIWILLIGE Intimleben zweier Erwachsener nicht harmloser, als hundertfache Lügen des nächsten US-Präsidenten, der damit einen illegalen Angriffskrieg, mehrere Hunderttausend Tote und einen dreistelligen Milliarden-Betrag Kosten verursachte?

Offenbar nicht, denn es wurde nie versucht George Bush Junior zu impeachen.

Um 2004 wurde es zum Running Gag nach einer Person zu fahnden, die GWB endlich einen Blowjob verpasste, um ihn des Amtes zu entheben.

Eine blöde Idee, gegen die viele rationale Gründe sprachen; insbesondere aber die noch schlimmere Alternative:
Dick Cheney wäre anchgerückt.

Bush mag zwar total verblödet, ungebildet, faul und schwer religiotisch gewesen sein, aber sein Vize war zusätzlich auch noch zutiefst bösartig.

Ich glaube nicht, daß GWB ein Rassist oder Misogynist gewesen ist.

- Ob sich der alte weißte Mann Cheney eine schwarze Frau als Vertraute, Sicherheitsberaterin und Außenministerin geholt hätte, wage ich zu bezweifeln.

  Putting Cheney in charge would be really bad. Putting anybody else in charge would be worse!

Let's imagine for a moment that the Democrats could actually get a conviction. If Bush is impeached and convicted, who becomes president? The most straightforward scenario has the President convicted and Cheney stepping in to be president. I assume I don't need to enumerate to a dailykos reader the ways in which Cheney could potentially be worse than Bush... it would be hell. Remember, Cheney is old, un-electable, and has a reputation so bad he may as well not worry about a legacy... Cheney would be in charge, and would have nothing to lose. Don't go to sleep thinking about that, you will get nightmares.

Anyway, that is the simplest scenario, but it is not the most likely. A much more likely scenario is that Cheney steps down if impeachment (either Bush's impeachment or his own) looks immanent. The Republican Party will nominate a candidate to replace him, and unless the candidate is really obviously not qualified, Democrats will find it difficult to block a moderate republican. The R's will pick one like John McCain or Rudy Guliani, someone who has presidential ambitions and a reputation of independence. Bush gets impeached and convicted, and the Republicans suddenly have shiny, new, re-electable incumbent candidate who can disassociate himself from Bush's record and condemn the partisan and power-motivated politics that lead to Bush's impeachment. As Democrats, why on earth would we put ourselves in this situation?

Tactically, we want to run the 2008 election against Bush's cronies and his record, not against an "anti-bush" Republican, especially not one who has suddenly gained the power of incumbency! [….]

(Daily Kos 13.10.2006)

Bei Donald Trump stehen wir vor einem ähnlichen Problem.

Der Mann mischt sich mit ungeheuerlichen Lügen schon jetzt so penetrant in Obamas Amtsgeschäfte ein, daß nach einem Impeachment gerufen wird.

Sicher würde eine Mehrheit der Amerikaner sehr erleichtert sein, wenn man Trump doch noch davon abhalten könnte ins Weiße Haus einzumarschieren.

Natürlich müßte dieser selbstzufriedene, größenwahnsinnige Lügenbold ohne Allgemeinbildung vom Präsidentenamt ferngehalten werden.

Aber was dann?

Am 19.11. tagte das Wahlmännergremium und bestimmte das Ticket Trump/Pence für den Job als potus und Vize.

Bei einem Ausfall Trumps würde Pence übernehmen, der nicht gebildeter und noch viel fanatischer homohassend ist.

Der Hardcorereligiot will zurück ins Mittelalter und noch exzessiver Menschen diskriminieren. Was für ein Alptraum im Jahr 2017.

[….] Donald Trump would roll back Barack Obama’s orders on LGBT rights, his running mate Mike Pence has confirmed.

[….] President Obama last year signed an executive order outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity among federal contractors. Earlier this year his administration followed up with guidance to schools, urging them not to discriminate against transgender students.

In the interview, Dobson asked Pence whether Obama’s guidance would be reversed.

The VP candidate confirmed that the Republicans would roll back Obama’s orders so that “the transgender bathroom issue can be resolved with common sense at the local level”.

He said: “This is such an example of an administration that seems to have… there’s no area of our lives too small for them to want to regulate, no aspect of our constitution too large for them to ignore.

“Donald Trump and I both believe these questions can be resolved with common sense at the local level.

“These issues are resolved in the state of Indiana whenever they come up, and they should be resolved, for the safety and wellbeing of our children first and foremost, their privacy and rights, and with common sense. Donald Trump and I simply believe all of these issues are best resolved at the state level, by communities.”

[….] “I’m a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order. The Trump-Pence administration will be dedicated to preserving the liberties of our people, including the freedom of religion that’s enshrined in our Bill of Rights.”

It is the latest in a string of concessions to anti-LGBT evangelicals.

[….] Pence has one of the worst records on LGBT rights of any candidate on a major party’s Presidential ticket in recent times. 

A hardline evangelical, the Governor of Indiana stirred up international outrage last year when he signed Indiana’s controversial ‘Religious Freedom Restoration Act’, which gave businesses the right to discriminate against gay people on the grounds of religion.

Governor Pence previously suggested that HIV prevention funding be drained in order to fund state-sponsored ‘gay cure’ therapy, and earlier this year appeared unable to answer when asked whether it should be legal to fire people because of their sexuality.

An investigation last month found that Pence approved extreme anti-LGBT articles when he was the head of the Indiana Policy Review journal in the 1990s. [….]

(Nick Duffy, 07.10.2016)