Eric Scigliano has written on varied environmental, cultural and political subjects for many local and national publications. His books include Puget Sound: Sea Between the Mountains, Love War and Circuses (Seeing the Elephant), Michelangelo’s Mountain, Flotsametrics and the Floating World (with Curtis Ebbesmeyer), The Wild Edge, and, newly published, The Big Thaw: Ancient Carbon and a Race to Save the Planet.
Is there something here I’m not getting? Yes, Trump merits impeachment for trying to overturn a legitimate election and the constitutional system underlying it and stoking the attack on the Capitol through two-plus months of false and inciteful claims. Still, why? This impeachment was a mug’s game from the start, and it looks even worse now.
In the first 12 months that the doctor oversaw her treatment, he prescribed her 4,070 30mg pills of Oxycodone, 2,450 8mg pills of Hydromorphone, along with a slew of muscle relaxants, antidepressants, sedatives, anxiety and anti-inflammatory pills.
As reality bit and the terminology changed over the coming days, you could track the emerging acknowledgment at the network (and the Right generally) as to just what happened at the Capitol, and who instigated it.
Of course some restrictions would be needed to keep them open, starting with the usual 25 percent capacity, six-foot distance, and masking requirements. But the fact that some institutions can’t operate safely in a pandemic shouldn’t doom those that can.
The harms, as widely noted, are multiple: Jamming the complex transition process and handicapping the new administration. Exposing the country to adversaries while it’s frozen in molt. Discrediting even further the liberal democracy America once exemplified.
Nobody on the right seems to be claiming that the president “won.” Instead, from most of Fox News’s stable to the Wall Street Journal and conservative commentators on the mainstream networks, they’ve taken refuge in false equivalency, branding the evening "a brawl,” “a shitshow,” “two children fighting,” “a messy debate with multiple attacks.”