RawStory’s Tom Boggioni reports on something I would never watch myself: Fox news talking to a “political insider” for the “inside thinking” on the politics of politics. Oy. Nonetheless, the insider raised a good question: Are house democrats a good witch or a bad witch?

“There is real danger for the president lurking out there,” Stirewalt cautioned the Fox News host. “Republicans — if they lose control of Congress  — there is a very strong chance that Donald Trump will be impeached.”

 

Right. Okay, then. But I don’t often see Republican political operatives praise congressional democrats, so what’s really going on here? And just how inside is this insider if he doesn’t realize that the biggest danger for Trump is that he will forget where he puts his memories if he doesn’t poke himself in the memory bucket every so often?

Perhaps the esteemed insider can clarify a bit about this whole thing, so we can understand why he’s broadcasting such good reasons for the nation to vote democratic in 2018?

“These are politicians,” the editor observer explained.“When Republicans impeached Bill Clinton I’m sure there were other things that the American people wished that they would have focused on, but they focused on satisfying a bloodthirsty base.”

He then speculated, “I’m sure there would be many calls among Democrats to do the same. And that is the real danger for Trump.”

 

But wait. I thought it was bad that the Republicans impeaching Clinton for answering the question about “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky “No”. I mean, while sexual relations can be a broad term, it can also be a synonym for sexual intercourse, and if you interpret the question that way then Clinton’s answer was true. So republicans were impeaching Clinton for interpreting a vague question asked by a  prosecutor in the manner that required the least possible disclosure from himself. Needless to say, that’s far from illegal, and sounds very much like what every criminal defense attorney tells every person they represent who is being deposed. “Don’t say more than you absolutely have to” is always the advice. If Clinton answers yes, then he has to answer the inevitable follow up describing exactly what took place and volunteering that this may not be sexual relations, depending on the definition, but it might be, so he thought that getting his voice on tape describing blow jobs and cigar-fucking was just a good idea. If Clinton answers no, he’s just being a lawyer and politician giving a weaselly but true answer.

Sounds like the Republicans really were being bloodthirsty back in the 90s. It also doesn’t sound the same as impeaching a president for active attempts at obstructing justice by prematurely ending an investigation.

But if it were the same, then …

… Democrats would weigh the same as a duck!

Y’know, I have a lot of complaints about the Democratic congressmembers, but being too zealous in their efforts to hold executive branch officials accountable is not one of them.

I give up: are congressional Democrats a good witch or a bad witch?