Bridge to Far

Was sick all last week and this week kind of hammered so short thought today, responding to Scott Morefield's latest article.

Might there be some who want to see him impeached as a sort of punishment or check, but think tearing the country apart by removing a sitting president and essentially undoing the 2016 election is a bridge too far? It’s quite likely, but we won’t find out with any of these polling methods.

The thing is there's an element of truth in his contention.  If it really was a perfect call and there was no quid pro quo than yeah actually bringing Trump to the Senate floor to remove him from office is a bit too much.   But in the calculation of many, there is enough evidence there to justify further investigation, and everything we find out seems to paint the President as more and more guilty. 

Morefield's (and the President's) argument seems to be, if you don't have enough to get a conviction, end the investigation immediately.   Pretty good deal for the President, but let's recall the Starr investigation which started off looking Whitewater and ended up being about the President having sex - if the Morefield investigation policy had been in place then would Clinton have still been impeached? 

Well of course - Clinton's a democrat, and he's surely guilty of something, but Trump is a republican so any investigation is phony baloney.