Impeaching Noem would send a message

The Trump administration’s response to the two recent killings in Minneapolis has achieved the peculiar distinction of being both horrifying and ridiculous at the same time — like watching “The Death of Stalin,” except without the self-awareness or the courtesy of being fiction. One of the faces of this farce is that of Kristi Noem, the cowgirl-hat-wearing secretary of Homeland Security, who told the nation that Renee Good and Alex Pretti were “domestic terrorists,” while the immigration officers who killed them were just practicing, you know, wholesome, all-American defensive shooting.

It takes a special kind of audacity to announce the exact opposite of what everyone can plainly see on viral videos. Which raises an obvious question: Why would anyone attempt a lie this naked and doomed? Noem became a serial prevaricator the same way that teenager in the old anti-drug ad learned to smoke weed: “I learned it by watching you.” Trumpworld is a finishing school for shamelessness. Graduates are taught that prudence is weakness, apology is surrender and reality itself is alterable — if you just say the right words with enough swagger.

In this environment, everyone must butch up, flex, overcompensate and constantly project toughness, cruelty and dominance. But strictly adhering to the MAGA prime directive isn’t enough to guarantee your job. Eventually, some loyalists get thrown under the bus. They’re sacrificed not for disobedience, but for no longer being useful. We saw this recently when the Border Patrol commander, Gregory Bovino, was ousted from his role in Minneapolis. Bovino wasn’t demoted because Trumpworld suddenly discovered he did something immoral or incompetent, but because the polls moved, Republicans got spooked and the boss needed a scapegoat.

Which brings us back to Noem — and the question of whether she deserves to be the focus of our attention and lawmakers’ next impeachment campaign. Noem didn’t create this culture. Nor did she pull the trigger. So why focus on Noem? Why obsess over mere words? Norm Macdonald once recalled a fellow comedian saying the worst part about Bill Cosby’s fall from grace was the hypocrisy. Macdonald disagreed. The worst part in his opinion? It was the sexual assault. (Cosby was convicted in 2018.)

Likewise, in Minneapolis, the killing is obviously the worst part. But Noem’s lying is the part that probably tells us the most. The killings reveal a poisonous enforcement culture on the ground. But the subsequent propaganda campaign exposes the political culture upstream that nourished it and that now insists black is white and 2+2=5.

Critics argue that removing Noem would change nothing. The structure remains. The incentives remain. Trump and Stephen Miller would still be perched at the drafting table, designing systems that incentivize brutality and punish restraint. This critique is fair — but incomplete.

Messages do not always flow neatly from the top. They seep downward through example. People notice who is protected, who is sacrificed and who is allowed to lie with impunity while staring straight into the camera.

Cultures don’t change overnight; they change when consequences interrupt the status quo. Besides, going after Noem does not preclude other efforts to rein in immigration agencies or dismantle Trump’s cruelty-industrial complex. This is not the whole war. It’s one front. Noem is not the source of the rot. But she is one of its most prolific messengers. Holding her accountable would not cleanse the system — but it would expose it.

A Senate trial could unearth new information and force a further public confrontation with the lies told to excuse violence. If Republicans vote to defend the indefensible, that’s their choice. Conversely, in the event that some moderate Republicans decide to break from Noem and Trump, that’s helpful in a different way. And if Trump refuses to remove Noem, that refusal also clarifies the stakes — stakes that can be revisited, loudly and publicly, in November’s midterm elections.

The argument is not that impeaching Noem would fix everything. It’s that refusing to try — when action is warranted, meaningful and achievable — would be a missed opportunity and an abdication of responsibility. A line has been crossed. Kristi Noem crossed it. And in any functioning republic, that’s when someone — at or near the top — must be shown the door.