The problem with this kind of thinking can be summed up by the parts I’ll put in boldface.
Things are going a little sideways now, wouldn’t you agree? The world is not coming to an end, exactly, but our arrangements in it are breaking up all at once, threatening to wreck everyday life for a whole lot more people than just the poor mutts on the margins. The endless insults to common decency and common sense by the vicious governing blob that runs things don’t help, either. The main question du jour: when things break really badly, will they break against that vicious blob hard enough to make it stop?
This blob — a weird cabal alien to our heritage — is composed of people with names and duties, and institutions too. They have already lost their credibility, their authority, and their legitimacy. The problem is that they haven’t lost their power to wreck our country. Exposed and disgraced as they are, they still occupy the seats of command, still twiddle the dials on the control console, still enjoy a foolish illusion of invulnerability.
I’m in favor of wholesale impeachment of these top people as the best way to go, first, to pry their hands off the levers of power, and second, use the process of impeachment to move public sentiment to a firmly anti-blob position.
See what I’m talking about? Those two statements are self-evidently contradictory. If they still occupy the seats of command—and they assuredly do—how the hell do you propose to successfully impeach them, then? Do you seriously expect a system under their control to right itself just because you have your lawyers ask their lawyers, nicely and politely, to cut out the shenanigans and skullduggery? Even if that miracle somehow does happen, who’s going to make it stick? Or, in Stalin’s famous (and possibly apocryphal) formulation, how many divisions has the Pope?
Yes, their assumption of invulnerability is in fact a foolish illusion, but not because they’re afraid of being impeached. It’s the same old story, though: the Second Amendment has no power against tyranny if Our Side has preemptively foresworn to see that’s it enforced—ie, to ever do anything with all those guns but keep them safely locked in gun safes or closets no matter what…exactly as the rabid opponents of the 2A have mandated. They did that for a reason, and so far it’s worked out quite well indeed for them.
There’s more to Kuenstler’s piece, of course, lots of it good. But in the end he’s self-stymied by some too-familiar habits of thought and emotion: the hopeless faith that, in a rigged game wherein the rules are arbitrary and favor one side over the other, appeals to the umpire might still somehow save the day. That, despite a veritable Everest of indisputable evidence to the contrary that stacks up higher each and every day, there’s still something of honesty and probity left in the crooks and grifters at the helm of the ship of (Super)state. That, in people visibly, demonstrably evil to their very marrow, there is nevertheless some good in them somewhere that might somehow be brought forth, if we can only appeal to it vehemently enough.
Would that it were so. Alas, it is not. The number of decent men in the US Congress can be counted on one’s fingers without resort to one’s toes; much as I do appreciate them, Rand Paul and Matt Gaetz will never be able to impeach anybody all by themselves. As to dismantling Foggy Bottom, fuhgeddabouddit, ain’t gonna happen without gunplay.
Not that pointing out the mal- and mis-feasance rife throughout FederalGovCo isn’t a worthwhile endeavor, mind; in fact, it’s a vital step in the whole long slog. I repeat: a process, not an event. But at some point cold, hard steel (or lead) must come into play, and all the pleas in the world for comity and gentlemanly restraint aren’t going to change that.