The post-partum impeachment

What do the second Trump impeachment trial and the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act," which recently "failed [not for the first time] to receive the necessary 60 votes to be included in the budget resolution, receiving only 52 votes in favor and 48 votes against," have in common? 

The answer can be found in something the left values far more than life itself — obtaining its goals and protecting them at any cost.

There's an incredible lack of support among the Democrats for this bill, which seeks what would only seem humanely reasonable: to require medical treatment for babies that survive an abortion, even as polls consistently indicate that most Americans support some restrictions on abortion and don't support their taxpayer dollars going to underwrite abortions.  

As one of its primary authors and staunchest advocates (as well of its predecessor, the "Born-Alive Act" [2002]), renowned writer; speaker; and Ney Professor of Jurisprudence at Amherst College, emeritus, Hadley Arkes, often asserts, Democrats reject the act because for them, "the right to abortion mean[s] the right to an 'effective' abortion, meaning a dead child."

But, more importantly, they know, as Arkes states, "the strategy [of the Act and the 2002 Born-Alive Act] ... was to lure people from the [pro-abortion] side by showing the reach of that right to abortion[.] ... And from there we might start rolling back that practice of abortion step by step." 

Conversely, Democrats in Congress overwhelmingly support the second Trump impeachment, despite its highly questionable constitutionality.  To them, the right to an impeachment even when he's out of office, as newly discovered and applied to Donald Trump, means the right to an effective impeachment — that is, a politically dead Trump.

More specifically, this is about a political neutering intended to prevent him from ever again exercising any potency over American politics and its public discourse — a Hiroshima-sized rationalization of an extreme pre-emptive strike at an ex-president to prevent even greater existential casualties of policy for the party.

If Trump were to be actually convicted, (which he won't be), might we not expect a second Time exposé, this time reveling, in the post-partum impeachment, the final prong in a pre-election plan by "a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election — an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted ... in order to ensure that democracy in America endures"?

So too, as with the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act," Democrats realize that the Trump phenomenon is about slowly chipping away at the progressives' near total domination of U.S. politics and culture.

For progressives, who pride themselves on always playing long game one hard earned policy inch at a time, "giving an inch" also means "giving a mile."  That's a mile they will take back with a vengeance and with interest when next able — whether it be paid for in dead babies or dead constitutional rights.

As evidence, we need only consider the reason behind the volcanic eruption of "40 [and counting] executive orders and actions," flowing from Biden's hand, "since taking office" — a pent up release of a pressure cooker, four years in the making.  And not coincidently, several of these have to do with reversing Trump's restrictions on abortion at home and abroad.

Forty executive orders and actions and a second impeachment trial.  What better way to take back that lost mile?  And what better way to lift the left out its four-year-long post-partum depression following the 2016 loss of the White House, which gave birth to the Trump Revolution?

Image: Pix4Free.

If you experience technical problems, please write to