Pistol Pete at the not-OK Corral

Regarding the unsuccessful (so far) impeachment of Secretary Hegseth, I'm going to reiterate part of a previous post (Yes Kings! April 24) -- the one dealing with war powers. But first -- consider that war powers are reserved for, and limited to, the president. No one in the cabinet, or anywhere else in the administration, has the right to initiate or continue hostilities -- not that they don't occasionally assume that right, but unless it's on direct orders from the president they are acting in an unconstitutional (and possibly illegal) manner. In Hegseth's case, I'm pretty certain that anything he did in this area was the response to a direct order from Trump. So logically, the people in Congress who want to impeach Hegseth should be impeaching Trump -- so why aren't they? Perhaps they figured that Hegseth was an easier mark. Perhaps they figured that if impeached, Hegseth would become a burden on the administration and wind up being fired. But even that would hardly change things when it comes to the exercise of war powers. Trump would just put someone else in his place and carry on.

Or -- maybe it's just symbolic... just theater... just a shot off Trump's bow. And that would make a kind of sense. But at this point, Trump has no reason, as far as I can tell, not to keep Hegseth in place, and every reason to defend him as needed, since he (Hegseth) was, presumably, only following orders (hmmm... where have we heard that before?).

So here's the excerpt re: war powers:

When it comes to war – armed conflict between the US and other countries – the president, as commander in chief, seems to have dictatorial powers.

Ah, but wait! – you might say. Only Congress has the power to declare war. Right? Very true. So... when's the last time Congress actually declared war? The answer is... 1942. So... what were all of those other wars we've fought since then? Well... some were what were euphemistically called “police actions”, some were based on United Nations Security Council Resolutions, some on “Joint Resolutions” or just “Resolutions”. This is the triumph of euphemism. If our troops are dying, and our resources are being squandered, it's a war, no matter what you call it.

But wait! Doesn't Congress have “the power of the purse”? Well... technically yes. But, #1, they can always be intimidated into releasing more funding for pretty much any war the president decides to engage in, especially if a negative vote would put their re-election chances in danger. And if not that, then we have what are called fungible resources. The president can divert funds from pretty much any government program into another, including the military. And besides, our national economy has been on a wartime footing since World War II. There was never a “peace dividend” – that's a myth. We have been prepared for war for over 80 years now. The troops have been in place, the weapons and ammunition were always on hand (and updated on a regular basis), the logistics were ready... all that was required was the green light from the White House. (The last war that took us any amount of time to “gear up” for was World War II. Lesson learned! Always be ready, because a war might start tomorrow.) (This is what the Pentagon calls “readiness”.)

(End of excerpt)

So, bottom line -- there really isn't one right now. But it's clear that the Democrats -- and the DSA wing, which is the one that has actual blood in their veins -- is warming up for the main event, which is countless impeachments, hearings, lawsuits, and so on, starting in earnest in January. The notion, of course, is to render Trump a lame duck (except for war!) for his remaining two years in office, and then to march to overwhelming victory in November of 2028. But hey, a lot can happen in two months, and even more in four years. So it's a bit early for victory parades. But the most concentrated energy is clearly on the DSA side, and they can't wait to get the old guard (Schumer, Pelosi, Obama, the Clintons, et al) out of the way. Because, you see, they have a vision -- an answer to what's wrong with America! (And socialism really does work when it's done right!) But wait, didn't Trump have a vision and an answer, and isn't that what MAGA was all about? No wonder if the American public is feeling a bit whiplashed at this point.

The problem is -- as I've said many times -- we are, and always have been, a nation of ideas -- of concepts and ideals, of visions -- as opposed to eternal verities like race, ethnicity, religion, language, and the perennial struggle for power, property, gold, and suchlike (AKA human nature) -- things that have characterized pretty much every society down through history, up to the present day. Most societies -- states, nations, empires -- have been satisfied with those ordinary and all-too-human values and priorities. But not us! Our history is characterized, more than anything else, by what is called, in calmer times, a marketplace of ideas, but which is, at present, a _war_ of ideas. But this is our heritage, and we have to live with it, for good or ill. No one's going to stand up and say "Let's forget about ideas, and just live like normal people." Nope. Ain't gonna happen. So basically, doing away with ideas is an idea no one likes. And if we even seem to be suicidal at times -- in terms of foreign policy, domestic policy, the national debt, and so on, it's all part of the 250-year-long pendulum swing that is America.