Tina Dupuy, a writer, a SiriusXM Progress channel host, and former Capitol Hill staffer penned an opinion for USA Today
suggesting we eliminate the office of the president altogether. Whether intended as satire or her actual opinion, if nothing else, it shows where her head’s at.
Dupuy didn’t base her call to drop the executive branch on the office but rather on its current office-holder, President Donald Trump, and dedicated the first three paragraphs to over-the-top, vitriolic Trump bashing.
She described the president as “a bloated authoritarian lounging in his bathrobe in a 200-year-old mansion,” who only won the election by conspiring with a foreign power, and only prevailed through the Electoral College, which she described as “a scab of slavery in the Constitution.”
Accordingly, Trump became a “usurper” rather than a duly-elected president, who nonetheless has “the full power of the” office, including commander-in-chief. She implied that he’s “a treasonous turncoat who got into the White House on a technicality.”
Yes, she reduced the Constitution to “a technicality.”
Dupuy also gave Trump powers he doesn’t have. She claimed that the president “can unilaterally annihilate millions of people with his command to deploy nuclear weapons,” apparently unaware that the Constitution gives Congress war powers.
And Dupuy accused Trump of imaginary sins, claiming he “made refugees begging us for mercy into orphans ... because he can.”
Dupuy stated the “overwhelming majority” of Americans believe Trump is “horrible and so unpopular and so obviously corrupt,” and that he ascended to the White House although “only about 25 percent of eligible voters” voted for him.
She’s apparently living in a liberal bubble and should consider getting out more often.
While reading her words, you’re tempted to keep glancing up to the masthead. Yep, it’s not Mother Jones or Rolling Stone — it’s USA Today.
Dupuy then devoted the next three paragraphs to pulling the rug out from under Rep. Maxine “Impeach-45” Waters, D-Calif., and turning the congresswoman’s dreams into dust. She submitted that impeachment won’t work.
On that one point we can agree.
Dupuy gave examples of historical figures, including former Presidents Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and Andrew Johnson, the last described as "the vilest radical and most unscrupulous demagogue in the Union." In each case impeachment didn’t get rid of the scoundrels.
But she missed the real reason it won’t work when it comes to Trump: In order to impeach a federal office-holder, a majority of the House of Representatives must agree that he’d committed “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Trump can be accused of a lot of things, but there’s not a shred of evidence that he’s committed a crime in office.
She finally concluded that we must, “Abolish [the] presidency to save [the] democracy,” which provides a clue into the underlying basis for her complaint.
The United States isn’t a democracy. If it were, her candidate, “crooked” Hillary Clinton would be once again occupying the White House, only in that instance she’d be the one wearing the pants(suit).
But because we’re a republic, Trump became the 45th president of the United States.
Dupuy observed that historian Barbara Tuchman first advanced the notion of removing the office of the presidency when Nixon was chief executive. She made her suggestion “owing to the steady accretion of power in the executive over the last forty years.”
Taking her inspiration from Comedy Central, Dupuy asked her readers to amend the Constitution to get rid of the “autocrat” in power, even if it requires that we “fight a mad king” to do it.
If Trump is king and autocrat, he’s the only one in world history that the courts have repeatedly denied him the power to do that which his predecessors routinely accomplished.
He’s the only king and autocrat in world history unable to cajole Congress to do his bidding — even though his party controls both chambers.
And although the Clintons and Obamas multiplied their wealth by virtue of their time in the White House, Trump will be the only king and an autocrat in world history who will leave office poorer than he entered it.
“My fear isn’t Trump,” Dupuy claimed. “It’s that the next autocrat is most likely smarter and savvier than Trump,” Dupuy says.
Trump’s certainly “smarter and savvier” than his predecessor, though not as smarmy. He created a booming economy, set minority unemployment at historic lows, removed the chains of excessive regulation from industry, and restored fear in our enemies and respect from our allies.
As Shakespeare put it, “The lady doth protest too much.” In this case Dupuy apparently allowed her intense hatred to cloud her judgment.
While she correctly reasoned that the odds aren’t in her favor to impeach Trump, she fails to understand that she has even less chance of amending the Constitution.
Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and has been a frequent contributor to BizPac Review and Liberty Unyielding. He’s also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and an enthusiastic Second Amendment supporter, who can often be found honing his skills at the range. To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.