The premeditated impeachment of Trump has picked up steam. I surmise, though, that it’s likely to turn into fine dust at some celestial body beyond the rainbow.

The divided Democrats and their stenographers (media mob) couldn’t figure out what the President committed in “high crime” that is sufficiently credible to remove him. A nothing burger!

Moreover, since when do we send people to jail without the commission of a crime and due process rights?

Without solid basis for removal, the entire agenda turns into using the system to concoct a narrative as if true. It’s a waste of everybody’s time!

Trump is getting famous for mixing the wrong words with expletives. But that’s the Don and I’d rather have him speaking his mind than getting caught in vicious sanctimonious diplomacy.

Anyway, how do you delegitimize 63 percent of voters who placed Trump in the White House? Incidentally, those who’d vote for impeachment are fully aware that it could also be the end of their career, given that Trump won in states where they came from. Thus, the polite shy from braving suspect courage.

I don’t know Trump but have read his grand success reviving the national economy beyond levels last seen over 50 years ago. It meant millions of jobs for fellow Americans that have gone back to work with pride! That’s the Donald!


Removal of the president is an involved undertaking that begins with the adoption of a resolution of impeachment in the U.S. House of Representatives. It is then forwarded to the U.S. Senate. It is there that a trial is held conducted by the chief justice.

Well, at least there’s fun listening to all the ignorance triggered by the hyped hoax. It must be a sad day for liberal left Democrats and their stenographers—media mob. At least it forced my researching the requisite procedure for impeachment to begin.

The issue is a purposeful political disruption laced with hyperbolic rhetoric critical of the successful work hailing from Trump’s determination to “Make America Great Again.” Perhaps Da Boysis are on steroids, di ba?

The political gamesmanship started with the Trump-haters. That you don’t like the President doesn’t evolve into a crime you could attach to him. Nah! Remember, 63 percent of fellow Americans placed him in the Oval Office—a difficult verdict to delegitimize.

Trump’s soaring economy has brought some seven million jobs to nearly six million jobless folks who are now gainfully employed and out of food stamps and poverty—a grand performance unseen since 50 years ago.

Moreover, even fresh hires have found more money in their new jobs; that means additional support for basic needs at home. Would I dare ruin this because I don’t like the Donald? Personal feelings aside, my fellow man deserves the opportunity to lead a healthy family life with a meaningful job that grants them a sense of pride.

Indeed, the magnitude of this level of politics isn’t what I’m used to at the provincial level. But why would corporate giants and powerful Democrats want to reverse the livelihood of the multitude to abject poverty and hardship once more?


It’s understood that policies are designed to help improve the quality of life of folks in the villages. We haven’t heard nor seen any major policy decision since recent past. Or perhaps there’s one in the oven, so to speak? Or is it a case of rehearsed despondence?

It’s an urgent issue given that nearly 15,000 employees are stuck in poverty-level wages and salaries. In the process, the quality of life for families is compromised. Is it an issue Da Boysis would take up anytime soon as a matter of fiduciary duty?

If reliance is on the economy to boost income, then nothing has been done since recent past on this score. It is still an outstanding issue that requires a lot of work, including exploring if opportunities exist and if so, what are they? Combined, it’s serious family table issue that is far from seeing even a faint light of day. Everbody home?


Has investment stirred more businesses here or has it stagnated—stayed the same—for one reason or another. I know Nippon investment is history. Has anyone looked into the negative effects of this phenomenon or “not yet, already?” How much revenue did we lose out of said exit?

Unless there’s fresh investments we’d have to endure hopeful tomorrows in the negative effects of the drop in the economy. Any idea how do we shift stagnation into real time new investments beyond “que sera?”

John S. Del Rosario Jr. | Contributing Author
John DelRosario Jr. is a former publisher of the Saipan Tribune and a former secretary of the Department of Public Lands.
Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.