Houston Congressman Al Green thinks impeaching President Donald Trump will suddenly close the racial divide in America. The Democrat suggested Trump’s ousting would be a public cleansing for the nation.

This bigotry. This hate. This homophobia, Islamaphobia, xenophobia is a part of our Original Sin. We in the Congress of the United States of America have an opportunity to do something about the Original Sin. We can do so by simply allowing these articles of impeachment that I will file, and bring to the floor of the House of Representatives this month, to be debated and voted upon…

This is one of the great issues of our time. People have to know where we stand. This is our opportunity and I beg that we would take advantage of it and let history know that when we had a chance to do something about the Original Sin of the United States of America, the sin which caused us to have a Civil War. The sin which took Dr. King’s life. The sin which took Abraham Lincoln’s life. When we had an opportunity to do something about the Original Sin, we took the opportunity and we did which was the most honorable thing to do and that was to impeach this president…

This is pure grandstanding and it is seriously doubtful impeachment of Trump would all of a sudden heal whatever racial wounds the United States has suffered. It’s not like we’ll all be standing with our hands held together, singing Kumbaya, once Trump is out of the White House (although a lot of people will probably breathe a sigh of relief, depending on his replacement). But it’s good for a sound bite and to make sure Green gets re-elected in 2020.

Green also suggested Trump’s tweets about Congresswomen Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley caused plenty of consternation across the U.S. This is a bit doubtful because most people know Trump tends to say or tweet rather doltish and blockheaded phrases. They probably just rolled their eyes and went, “there he goes again,” then went about their Sunday.

Odin knows Trump will most likely not give an apology even after defending his rhetoric earlier today. The Central Park Five are still waiting for an apology and they’ve been exonerated for years. So, if Trump won’t apologize for saying in the ’80s the death penalty in New York should come back, he won’t with Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, and Pressley.

The move by Green will probably fail – although he’ll likely get more support than he did in 2017 (AP has already looked at this issue here). It’s more likely the resolution to condemn Trump will pass, and maybe that’s all which should happen. The comments are appalling and completely out of line with the decorum expected of a United States president. However, it’s doubtful these fall under the notion of “high crimes and misdemeanors” labeled in the Constitution.

Green is right about one thing: Congress does need more of a backbone. It’s needed one for ages. One reason why this doesn’t happen is it’s a lot easier to rail about a problem – while in Congress or on the campaign trail – than actually do something about it. Republicans were against executive overreach before they were for it. Democrats were in favor of executive overreach before they decided it wasn’t a good idea. Plus, it’s much easier to complain about the jackass bureaucratic regulators than it is to just get rid of their departments – and not replace them.

It’s in this sense where St. George Tucker was absolutely correct when he warned in 1803 about the danger of an executive which acted more like a king than a president with checks and balances.

The limitations which the constitution has provided to the powers of the president, seem not to be sufficient to restrain this department within its proper bounds, or to preserve it from acquiring and exerting more than a due share of influence. To this cause it may be attributed, that in addition to the very extensive powers, influence, and patronage which the constitution gives to the president of the United States, congress have, from time to time, with a liberal hand, conferred others still more extensive; many of them discretionary, and not infrequently questionable, as to their constitutionality.

These circumstances but too well justify the remark, that if a single executive do not exhibit all the features of monarchy at first, like the infant Hercules, it requires only time to mature its strength, to evince the extent of its powers. Crescit occulto velut arbor avo.

Congress could actually do something about out-of-control executives, but they’re too busy virtue signalling for campaign ads.