This Blog is a part of my media social experiment. I believe a scientist has a duty to describe the world in all details, and a right to an interpretation. New posts are announced on Twitter.com/VV_TeachOlogy. Thank you for visiting, Dr. Valentin Voroshilov.
- you want to pass an intersection, you are close but the light just become
have a choice to make: you still have time to stop, or you can try to drive
right through hoping it's still gonna be yellow. You decide to drive it through,
and as soon as you entered the intersection, the yellow changed to red.
passed through the intersection (when you made your mind, there was no turning
back wasn’t there?) and when you did that, you saw a police car waiting for you
on another side behind a bush.
question is - what will the policeman do?
is not up to you, now the policeman has to make his or her mind.
might happen that the policeman was distracted and didn’t even see you driving
guy may have been in a very good mood and decided to let it slide.
policeman may stop you and give you a verbal warning.
can get an official printed warning.
finally, you can get a ticket.
soon as the policeman makes his/her mind, your fate is sealed.
matter what you would say, how hard would you try to get out of this, your fate
is made by the policeman based on different factors including his/her mood,
imagine that the policeman is actually your neighbor - the guy who hates you
because of whatever reason; in that case you are definitely gonna get a big ticket.
And even if you would decide to dispute the ticket in a court, the guy would
definitely show up (and BTW: technically, exactly the same could have happened even if the light was solid green).
this example we have many features that are similar to the impeachment inquiry
happening right now.
the set of options the policeman has.
#3 is the
choice the policeman makes based on whatever comes to his/her mind.
order to make the resemblance even closer, we can also imagine that while the
policeman is making the decision, there is a crowd of pedestrians chanting “Let
him go! Let him go!”, and another crowd chanting “Give him a ticket! Give him a
impeachment is a legal choice that the Congress can make (or not) based on
actions done (or not) by the President. The Congress decides if an action is
impeachable or not, the Congress decides
if it wants to initiate an impeachment inquiry or not.
course, in the current political environment, when we say “Congress” we mean
the majority party. Since the majority party in the House of Representative is Democrats
- democrats make a decision about the impeachment. And when they made that
decision, there is nothing Republicans or anyone else could do. Chanting “Let
him go!” using mass media will not move Democrats. The legal structure of the
impeachment has been established, and all Democrats need to do is to follow the
steps all the way up to the final vote.
is exactly what will happen - no matter what Republicans will do. Top Democrats
have not always demonstrated smart strategies; however, they are not complete
idiots - they wouldn't ever started the
impeachment inquiry if they wouldn't be willing to finish it.
media chanting, of course, is to keep the base excited all the way to the end,
and, hopefully, to move some undecided folks closer to your view.
are three possible outcomes from the impeachment process.
Donald Trump will resign before the final vote, citing health issues, which
actually might be the real case - he doesn't look so healthy or mentally stable.
second option is the one that everyone expects, i.e. the House of Representative
votes for the impeachment of the President, but the Senate decides not to remove
him. This outcome would energize both parties - supporters of Donald Trump and
my personal favorite outcome is the third one.
believe that there is some probability that a small number of Republican
senators would switch sides on the impeachment and would join the Democrats;
and also a small number of Republicans would not attend the impeachment vote at
all. That could give sufficient number of votes for removing the President. As
the Constitution says: “no Person shall be convicted without
the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.”
all what pro-impeachment people need - two-thirds of the Senators present
during the vote.
course, for anyone (except Mitt Romney) this flip would be the end of their
political carrier as a republican. But it doesn't mean that from making that
decision they won't gain something else instead. Given up a Senate seat is not
the end of a productive life, especially if in return one can gain a nice
position in the government or in the private sector.
reason I think this option is not entirely impossible is that I'm sure that the
impeachment itself started only after main players made some kind of a deal
behind close doors.
confident that among those players we would see (if we could watch what was happening
behind those doors) are Intelligent Services of the United States.
years, Donald Trump succeeded to significantly lower the influence of America
in the world. His presidency has become a threat to American interests – at least
in the eyes of top Intelligent Services officers.
rule of any conquer is “Divide and Conquer”.
divide, and then conquer.
Trump was able to bring a stronger divide to American public. Nowadays, it's
very easy to make Americans fight each other. And while Americans are being dragged
into an internal squabble, competitors are slowly but surely gaining the
influence in the “post-American” world.
the allies, giving away sensitive information, attacking people in the uniform,
especially in the Intelligent Services - all those actions resulted in the
growing opposition to the president.
last straw was leaving Syria.
sure that the Democrats and the Intelligence Services have been collecting (independently)
different options for an impeachment (and for different reasons).
not like the whistleblower went to Mr. Schiff and next day the impeachment
one of the people listening to that “perfect” call had a discussion with some
people involved in the area of national security (Mr. Schiff?). Someone somewhere
made a decision that (a) enough isenough and now is the time to begin an impeachment; and (b) the “perfect”
call may be used for that purpose. The decision was also made on who will become “a whistleblower”.
And so – the train has left a station, and now nothing will stop it until the
final vote will be casted in the Senate.
this point, though, it is absolutely does not matter anymore how the decision was
made, and why. The only facts that matter are that the President (1) can and
(2) will be legally prosecuted.
the point of view of the Intelligence Services, if the impeachment will be
successful, then the threat will be removed, and that is why I believe that right
now there are many conversations happening on the Capital Hill about what
Republican senators could be flipped and who and how would approach those people.
even if the Senate will not remove President Trump, the impeachment process itself
will at least restrain Donald Trump from making more damaging actions on the
summarize: the impeachment is “a go”; it does not matter what anyone thinks or
says or screams or streams about it - as long as the House Democrats stay
focused, they will push it through all the way to the end.
probably, the Senate will not remove Donald Trump.
is however a chance that the impeachment succeeds.
fact of the matter is that the Democrats should NOT build their 2020 strategy
based on some assumption about how would impeachment end.
Democrats would be really smart, they would realize that the only strategy that will bring them a victory is the strategy that
does not depend on the result of the impeachment and on the name of the
strategy exists, and I described it in numerous previous publications, like:
So, the impeachment is over (one way or another). What's next?
is my brief analysis of the future.
Sanders and Senator Warren have no chance to win, because whether they like it
or not, the majority of American people do not like word “socialism”. It
doesn't matter if the same people may like socialism as a governmental approach,
if some elements of it would be implemented. The most important fact is people really
do not like this word. Hence, and everyone who can be described as a socialist
will not beat Trump. How blind one must be NOT to see that?
to educate people about what “socialism” may mean is a job of a teacher, but
not a politician.
other candidates, except Mr. Joe Biden, may be good for becoming a vice president,
or for holding an important governmental position, but unfortunately carry no weight
sufficient to outweigh Donald Trump. Whether we like it or not, but so far, the
best candidate to beat Donald Trump is Mr. Joe Biden. Of course, if the Democrats
would be smart enough and ballsy enough to pursue the strategy not dependent on
the name of a candidate, the name would not matter as much. But, (1) they are
not smart and ballsy enough; and (b) even when using the strategy, having the candidate
with the highest chance of gathering the largest public support would be very
helpful. And now, that candidate is Mr. Joe Biden.
order to win the nomination and the presidency Mr. Biden does not have to do
much. He should speak in a way similar to Pete Buttigieg – vague and
inspirational (like I advised to Sen. Sanders). No need for issuing a new specific project every week – for that
he will have experts from both parties. The focus should be on American values,
American pride, economy and jobs. He should not sink into the debates media
want to drag him in; he should stick to “this is not important for most of the
Americans, this is and I will talk
about this”. He should praise all
other candidates, telling how good they would be as the Secretary of State, or the
Secretary of Commerce, or else – and he would be glad to invite all of them in
his team. Ideally, he should find and announce before the Convention who would be his running mate (Cory Booker? Julián
Castro? Kamala Harris? Oprah Winfrey? ).
to stop mentioning Obama.
needs to address his son’s allegations.
needs to say is “I don't know why my son was invited, what he did, we have
never discussed that, he is an adult and can do whatever he wants, and if
people wanted him to hire, I guess they had their reasons. But I raised my son,
and I know that he is a responsible and hardworking person, and I am sure that
he worked and done more than the sons of the Donald Trump combined”.