Impeachment: Two developments, neither bad

It looks like, with near unanimity, House Democrats are going to vote to impeach President Trump. The more moderate Democrats who considered voting the other way now say they must vote their conscience.

President Trump may have hoped to pick off the votes of enough Democrats to be able to characterize his impeachment as a left-liberal affair. It may be precisely that, but with Democrats who aren’t left-wingers falling into line, he won’t be able to make the case as plausibly as he would like.

But there’s a bright side. These Democrats are increasing the risk of losing in 2020. Next November, their constituents may vote their conscience and send these Dems packing (though in some cases only a few blocks to a D.C. lobbying shop).

The other impeachment development is that Democrats are floating the idea of calling off the impeachment process once they vote to impeach. How? By declining to transmit their articles of impeachment to the Senate for a trial.

Democrats may be floating this idea in the hope of gaining leverage with Mitch McConnell over how the Senate will proceed with a trial of the president. However, Larry Tribe, writing in the Washington Post, seems to think that House Democrats should withhold their articles of impeachment if the threat of doing so fails to sway McConnell.

I know that Trump says he wants a Senate trial, the longer the better. However, I’d be pleased if the Democrats followed Tribe’s advice.

Why? For four reasons. First, enough time has already been spent on this matter. Second, the public, I think, would interpret the Democrats’ move as a retreat — a confirmation that impeachment was just a gesture, not a serious move with a strong basis in law and fact.

Third, this move would put the Trump impeachment in a unique and less damning historical category. The impeachment would carry a big and puzzling asterisk.

Finally, not bringing the case to the Senate would let certain Republican Senators off the hook. Just as so-called moderate Democrats in the House face a risk by voting to impeach, some Senators who are up for reelection next year face a risk if they vote not to convict.

A Senator like Cory Gardner of Colorado can’t afford to vote to remove Trump from office. But if he votes not to, he might lose support he needs — e.g. from women and suburbanites. Tribe’s move would take Gardner and others out of this box.

I don’t see House Democrats pulling the plug on impeachment by not referring their articles to the Senate. But the fact that they are talking about doing so is a good sign. In part, it’s a recognition that things aren’t going well for them.

To be clear, if Mitch McConnell gives the White House a say in how the Senate conducts the trial of President Trump, the Democrats will have a legitimate beef. But if House Democrats overreact by pulling the plug on the proceedings, they will, I think, have shot themselves in the foot.

I hope they do.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses