Why Trump Will Resign in 2020

04 January 20

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

---

Why Trump Will Resign in 2020

Andy Ostroy, Medium
Ostroy writes: "As I first wrote over a year ago, Donald Trump will resign before his term is up."

Trump’s political and legal problems are mounting. And no amount of Tweeting will make them go away. He is now just the third president in history to be impeached. And despite what he and his defenders would like to believe, he’s facing a punishing Senate trial which likely won’t end in conviction and removal, but will be a campaign and PR nightmare.

The evidence against Trump is beyond incriminating. It’s devastating. And while he and Senate Leader Mitch McConnell continue to push for a quick trial with its shameful predetermined verdict, the public keenly sees one party desperately fighting to expose the truth while the other fights like animals to hide it and obstruct justice in a massive coverup. In the court of public opinion, Trump’s a goner.

In a new poll released this week a record-high 55% of Americans now want Trump removed from office…an increase from 48% just last week. Voters aren’t stupid. They’re paying attention. They care. And this number’s going to keep rising until McConnell can no longer ignore it.

Trump the narcissist has spent decades crafting and protecting his image. He will stop at nothing in doing so. This includes pretending to be his own publicist to leak exaggerated claims of his wealth and sexual prowess to pathological-lying and gaslighting reality. He hates being perceived on any level as a failure and loser, and is obsessed with boasting of massive success and “winning.”

Since his impeachment earlier this month we’ve witnessed Trump’s colossal emotional meltdown on TV and on Twitter, where he’s been breaking his all-time highs (as much as 125 tweets in one day) with attacks on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the ‘validity” of his very impeachment…a ludicrous charge he’s been leveling since Pelosi’s brilliantly withheld the Articles of Impeachment until McConnell agrees to conducting a fair trial with direct evidence and witnesses.

Trump also knows he’s lost much of his base (defined as everyone who voted for him in 2016). Gone are moderate Republicans, independents, college educated women, suburban women, minorities and many youth and seniors. His math and path to re-election no longer adds up.

Trump also lives in mortal fear of conviction in various states for his many financial crimes. He still fears the Mueller probe’s criminal referrals to the Southern District of NY, Eastern District of VA and elsewhere. And, he knows better than anyone that so much more evidence of his High Crimes and Misdemeanors will inevitably come out between now and the election.

Furthermore, Trump, the most immature, undisciplined, impulse-control-bankrupt, chaotic, self-destructive president to ever occupy the Oval Office, is sure to continue breaking laws. His hole will get deeper and deeper. He simply cannot help himself.

Which is why he will resign. He knows he’s going to lose. And lose big. Perhaps even in the largest, most humiliating landslide in American political history. And he will not subject himself to that.

Here’s how it’ll go down: When it’s become abundantly clear that he’s going to be a loser, and as the long arm of the law comes marching down the hall with threats of indictment, and more importantly when McConnell and the party abandons him, Trump will do what he always does: lie and gaslight. He’ll cut a deal (generously afforded out of respect to the office) and will craft a narrative that feeds his ego and allows himself a sensational, grandiose, self-soothing out. It won’t matter one bit that it’ll be all bullshit.

And here’s what he’ll likely say: “Many people are saying, but nobody’s taking about it…and you all know it better than me…that I’m gonna win this election bigly…the polls show it, even the fake-news media’s predicting it….probably gonna be the biggest win ever in the history of elections. Democrats, Crazy Nancy, Cryin‘ Chuck…they all know it and fear me winning again. But ya know what? Even though I’d win YUGE by millions and millions of votes… I don’t want it. Washington is a swamp and I’m tired of fighting these animals who are destroying America. I got what I wanted. I won the biggest victory ever in ’16 and we all know I’d do it again. I’ve proven what a winner I am! But now I’m gonna go back to my business where I’ll make $100-billion next year. And play a lot of golf…because, as you know, I never got to play much while I was working non-stop so hard for you! So, I’m outta here, suckas! You can have this crappy job and old, small shitty house! Politics is for losers! Nobody wins like Trump! Believe me…”

READ MORE

Karl Rove and Ari Fleischer, senior adviser and White House press secretary under the George W. Bush administration, appeared on Fox News Thursday night in the hours after the Trump administration assassinated top Iranian military official Qasem Soleimani. (photo: Fox News)

The Mainstream Media Is a Cheerleader for War With Iran
Belen Fernandez, Jacobin
Fernandez writes: "When it comes to war, we shouldn't expect balance from mainstream news outlets: the corporate media has never met a war it didn't like."
READ MORE

Larry Hopkins, who leads the United Constitutional Patriots, or UCP. (photo: AFP)

Leader of Militia That Rounded Up Immigrants Along US-Mexico Border Pleads Guilty to Gun Charge
Derek Hawkins, The Washington Post
Hawkins writes: "The leader of a militia that rounded up migrants at gunpoint along the U.S.-Mexico border has pleaded guilty to a federal weapons charge."
READ MORE

Ahead of the 2020 elections, 26 Republican House members have said they will not seek reelection, including (from left) Republican Reps. Will Hurd of Texas, Martha Roby of Alabama, Pete Olson of Texas and Rob Woodall of Georgia. (photo: Bill Clark, Tom Williams/Getty Images)

GOP Retirements Spike, Diminishing Hope of Retaking House Majority in 2020
Deirdre Walsh and Jessica Taylor, NPR
Excerpt: "The recent stream of Republicans announcing plans to retire in 2020 means GOP lawmakers may be losing hope that there is a path to retaking the majority in the House of Representatives next November."

So far, 26 House GOP lawmakers have announced they will not run for reelection, and two more have left office already and have prompted special elections.

Four of the Republicans who won't run for reelection are seeking other offices: Alabama Rep. Bradley Byrne and Kansas Rep. Roger Marshall for the Senate, Montana Rep. Greg Gianforte for governor and California Rep. Paul Cook for the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors in their respective states.

North Carolina redistricting also put some GOP lawmakers in solidly Democratic districts, including Reps. George Holding and Mark Walker, leaving them with little choice but to retire. Rep. Mark Meadows, a third North Carolina lawmaker and founder of the conservative Freedom Caucus, also announced his surprising decision to retire, although his seat remained one that voted heavily for President Trump.

On the Democratic side, nine members have said they will not run. Three are running for another office: Assistant Speaker Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico has decided to run for the Senate instead of for his House seat, while Massachusetts Rep. Joe Kennedy is challenging incumbent Democratic Sen. Ed Markey. Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is running for president and has said she won't run for reelection to the House regardless of whether she wins the nomination.

When control flips in the House, life in the minority party is often an adjustment. Most Republicans serving now are just learning what it's like when their party isn't in charge of the chamber.

They have little ability to steer the legislative agenda, and opportunities for bipartisan cooperation are scarce in an increasingly polarized House heading into a presidential election year. Republican conference rules imposing term limits for committee chair posts also mean that senior members have fewer leadership opportunities.

READ MORE

Mississippi State Penitentiary. (photo: AP)

Five Inmates Die Violently in Mississippi Prisons in One Week
CBS News
Excerpt: "A fifth inmate has died violently in a Mississippi prison this week, raising further questions about security as clashes between prisoners continue."

Mississippi's prison system has struggled to fill guard vacancies, with Hall saying it's difficult to attract people with salaries that start below $25,000 a year. Some guards end up bringing illegal drugs and cell phones into prisons. Criminal charges were filed in 2014 against 26 state correctional officers.

Some prisons, including South Mississippi, have areas where many prisoners are housed in bunks in one large room, instead of individual cells. This can lead to worsened security problems. South Mississippi, in Greene County, was locked down for almost all of 2019, in part because of guard shortages.

READ MORE

French labour union members and workers gather in front of the French oil giant Total refinery in Donges, France, January 2, 2020. (photo: Reuters)

Rail Strike Becomes Longest in France's History Since May 1968
teleSUR
Excerpt: "The ongoing train strike in France in opposition to pension reforms proposed by the government has become the largest continuous period of industrial action in the history of the country’s state rail company."
READ MORE

Several cases challenge natural gas pipeline routes, including across the Appalachian Trail, and question companies’ right to take land they don’t own. (photo: Inside Climate News)

2020: A Year of Pipeline Court Fights, With One Lawsuit Headed to the Supreme Court
Phil McKenna, Inside Climate News
McKenna writes: "After years of mounting opposition to the increasing build-out of oil and gas infrastructure, 2020 is shaping up to be the year that pipeline opponents get their day in court."

EXCERPTS:

One case headed to the U.S. Supreme Court takes a closer look at whether parts of the Appalachian Trail are off-limits to fossil fuel infrastructure and may determine the fate of two multi-billion-dollar pipelines. A defeat there, the industry argues, would severely limit its ability to get natural gas from the Marcellus shale to East Coast cities and export terminals. Another case weighs state sovereignty against pipeline interests and could have implications nationwide.

Meanwhile, a question of potentially greater significance looms: Can pipeline companies continue to justify taking private land as the public benefits of fossil fuel pipelines are increasingly questioned and the risks they pose to the environment and climate increase?

The rise of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, launched a natural gas boom that has fueled a rush of pipeline construction in recent years, with pipeline companies spending an average of $10 billion per year on expanding their pipeline network, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. That rush has racked up environmental violations in several states, and it has triggered a pushback by states, environmental groups and landowners.

Even in oil- and gas-rich Texas, where fossil fuel interests dominate state politics, landowners are pushing back on pipeline companies' use of eminent domain.

If the Appalachian Trail were to cut off gas deposits from the East Coast, the impact would be significant. The Marcellus and Utica shale gas formations beneath Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia are the largest source of fracked gas in the country and the trail lies between them and some of the country's largest cities and natural gas export terminals.

In a 2005 case, Kelo v. The City of New London, the Supreme Court ruled that a building developer's taking of private land constituted a public benefit because of the financial benefits the development would bring. The ruling is increasingly coming under question.

In September, a federal appeals court weighed in on a recently commissioned pipeline that ships natural gas from Ohio to Canada. In a rare challenge to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the agency that approved the project, the court asked FERC to explain how a foreign export pipeline benefits the public. FERC's response to the court is still pending.

"There are lots of arguments to say all of this new fossil fuel infrastructure is bad for the public interest," Bold Nebraska founder Jane Kleeb said. "You can bring up water, you can bring up climate change, you can bring up property rights, I think that this is leading to a Supreme Court case not only challenging Kelo but challenging the broader definition of what public interest is."

Kleeb said she anticipates this larger issue of what constitutes public interest when pipeline companies take private land to go before the Supreme Court in the next three to five years.

"I think you could even see it with KXL" she said, referring to the Keystone XL pipeline. "Not only is this a private gain project, but it has major climate implications that are not in the public interest."

On Dec. 20, a federal judge in Montana refused to dismiss one one case, brought by indigenous advocates and environmentalists, that alleges that President Donald Trump violated treaties and the U.S. Constitution when he issued a cross-border permit in March 2019 authorizing TC Energy Corporation (formerly TransCanada) to build the Keystone XL pipeline.

In another lawsuit, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North and South Dakota and other tribes are suing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and pipeline builder Dakota Access, LLC, over what they allege was a failure to properly consult tribes over the pipeline, which was completed in 2017. That case is moving forward at the same time Dakota Access is seeking permission from state regulators to double the pipeline's existing capacity.

READ MORE

---

Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation