I once wrote of David French that
David French has the unenviable job of being the voice of reason over at the National Review, which means that he has to find a “middle ground” between the True Trumpers of the pack and, well, the truth, which frequently means explaining that grunting like a hog and wallowing in one’s own filth isn’t as bad as it looks.
It’s not surprising that Dave tired of that racket, and now he has a new gig with a not-so-Trumpy fledgling email only publication “The Dispatch”, where he seeks a new middle ground between Trump and the Democratic Party. Last week he took a rather passive-aggressive poke at his former colleagues, remarking that
[E]ven the president’s most able defenders can’t defend his actions as worthwhile on the merits.
Here’s my good friend—and one of the smartest writers and analysts I know—Andy McCarthy, providing his own “bottom line”on Trump’s request that Ukraine investigate the Bidens:
“It was inappropriate for the president to point the Ukrainians specifically and explicitly at the Bidens. A more polished president would simply have said, “We want you to root out corruption, no matter how high up it goes, even in our own government”—the Ukrainians would have gotten the point and there would be nothing to criticize. Trump went about it crudely. Commendable? Of course not. A valid reason to vote against him in 2020? Surely. But it’s not impeachable.”
Yes, it’s okay for a president to pressure foreign countries into corrupting their legal systems and launching groundless, politically motivated criminal investigations by illegally withholding monies appropriated by Congress as long as he doesn’t say that that’s what he’s doing! Use a middle man, Donnie! Then they’ll “get the point” while you’re in the clear! Be the big man, not the trigger man!
So Andy McCarthy is one of the smartest writers and analysts David French knows. And, one would hope, one of the most morally challenged.
Afterwords
One could also point out that, by Mr. McCarthy's own lights, Donald Trump's actions do merit impeachment (and conviction and removal from office) because he did do all the things that Andy said he shouldn't have done. Not only did he commit the crime, he confessed to it when he knew his words were being recorded. Some “defense”!
