On impeachment, there are good arguments on both sides.
Allowing him to win an impeachment trial to then be set loose to run around the country campaigning, saying, “I’ve been totally cleared. I care about you, the Democrats only care about getting Trump,” is inept politics.
Yet it’s a terrible precedent not to impeach when there are ten clear criminal obstruction counts laid out by Mueller.
It’s a very tough one. I now fall on the side of impeachment, because 18 months is a lot more danger to endure, to both our national security and our democracy.
But I’ll trust the judgment of Nancy Pelosi, whatever she decides after this plays out over the next month.
I still believe in the wisdom of banding together and following an ethical and wise leader. We are not going to prevail if we do not coalesce around a shared strategy.
I am not willing to follow the judgement of Ms. Pelosi. I saw her exercise that judgement in 2006, when a newly elected Democratic majority would not even begin hearings into the war crimes of the George W. Bush administration. Democrats had a chance to slow or reverse the world’s steady spiral into an ever-deeper morass of officially sponsored brutality, torture, rape, and murder, It was Ms. Pelosi’s choice to instead focus on “more important” matters.
Tell me, can you remember — without looking it up — what those Democratic “priorities” were in 2006? What did the Democratic majority accomplish between 2006 and 2008 that was more important than saying “no” to an out-of-control GOP administration?
Ms. Pelosi had an opportunity to show the GOP, America, and the world that America is a nation of law. She chose to instead pursue partisan expediency.
That decision contributed to the recklessness, flagrant corruption, and willful arrogance of the current administration and its GOP Collaborators.
Impeachment proceedings are the most effective way to begin the laborious task of restoring law, order, honesty, and common decency to American government. I think that’s more important than Democratic Party expediency today.
I think that’s the most important next step towards demonstrating that the Democratic Party stands for something beyond the Democratic Party as we enter the 2020 campaign.
The election of Barack Obama and the 2008-2010 Democratic majority which passed the first major commitment to universal health coverage in a generation, along with a plethora of bills that advanced workers rights, women’s rights, gay rights, and civil rights. Not to mention finally ending the Iraq War.
Too often I think Democrats make the mistake of forgetting that we are the party of government and not a party of protest, even in the opposition. It is our job to keep the trains running and make sure the people who need help are getting help. It’s why it’s awkward when we shut down the government, as some in the left wanted over Trump’s wall. We hate seeing government workers lose paychecks and health care while the largely symbolic move does nothing to actually help the immigrants in question.
Impeachment cannot pass this Senate. Impeachment will not even pass the next Senate, even if Democrats are able to take the 4-5 swing seats needed for a majority. Until there are 66 Senators who are convinced Trump has committed an impeachable offense, it is a policy that cannot pass. And for what? President Handmaids Tale?
I think the better tactic is to continue to investigate the lawless actions of this administration and use the legislature and judiciary to check them wherever possible. Impeachment hearings might be the best method for assessing this, but it might also be a distraction from methods that are already working such as the Ways and Means push on taxes or the Senate Intelligence Committees work on Russian cyber interference or the investigation into security clearances violations. The last thing we want is our own version of Benghazi.
It also means it is the highest priority that we choose an electable nominee for 2020. It would be great to shatter some glass ceilings or get racial diversity on the ticket, but frankly the voters of MI, PA and WI matter far more to me than the DSA members already concentrated in blue states and blue cities. AOC and Ayanna Pressley are awesome, but there is no way someone like them can win the presidency right now. Not while we have the electoral college anyway.
Part of turning 30 and recovering from the disaster of my own campaign experience is recognizing what cannot be changed and what can be changed, as Niebuhr would have us do. In the word of Grover Norquist, we just need a warm body who signs our bills and passes our judges. Think the movement conservatives such as Bolton and Falwell and McConnell like that they have to constantly play footsie with a glorified toddler and porn star porker like Trump? It’s the price they are willing to pay for power. Paris is worth a Mass. Sometimes I think liberals try so hard to be pure and righteous that they forget this to their own detriment.
By all means both and. We need far more AOCs in Congress and frankly on Beacon Hill. That matters to me way more than electing the most left wing candidate President. I just want a warm body capable of beating Trump and signing AOCs legislation into law. This is how the right has played us and beaten us at the long game for decades. With the exception of their overreach on impeaching Clinton in 1998, when their passion got the best of their reason. We can learn from both examples.
In my view that answer is unresponsive. I mean what specific priorities came ahead of the promised hearings into the war crimes — the hearings never happened.
I think the Great Recession, in September of 2008 (a scant few weeks before the election) had MUCH more to do with Democratic wins in the 2008 elections than anything Nancy Pelosi did. My own belief is that the margins would have been wider had we done the right thing in 2006, I think the war would have ended sooner. I think more young people would have turned out.
I think we are the protectors of freedom, liberty, and human rights. I think that motivates nearly everything else we do. We support labor because it reflects our values, not because it makes the trains run on time.
The ONLY way to gain that support is to develop and present compelling evidence that the president MUST be removed. That has happened exactly once in our history, when Richard Nixon was forced from office. I remember that time well. I must remind you that there were not 66 votes in favor of Mr. Nixon’s impeachment when the impeachment investigation began in 1973. There were not 66 votes in favor when the impeachment hearings began on May 9, 1974. The necessary votes came AFTER the Watergate investigation revealed (especially through the unexpurgated transcripts of the White House tapes) the full extent of Mr. Nixon’s participation in the conspiracy.
It was that evidence that persuaded even Republicans that Mr. Nixon had to be removed. That can only happen if the current Congress initiates an impeachment investigation and schedules impeachment hearings.
I take the opposite learning from the GOP. I see a party that redoubles its commitment to its values (as abhorrent and dishonest as those values are) each time it loses. The GOP spent 10 years attacking Obamacare and ACA, and suffered a devastating loss in 2018 House race. They are STILL attacking Obamacare and the ACA.
Donald Trump’s strength comes from his constant pandering to the most extreme base of GOP voters. Mr. Bolton, Mr. Falwell Mr. McConnell and the rest of them are forced to embrace Mr. Trump because the GOP commitment to its reprehensible and dishonest values is so extreme and so unwavering.
The GOP did not go into the 2016 election talking about “who can beat Hillary Clinton”. They did not choose Donald Trump based on “Who is the most electable”. They won in 2016 because they have been fertilizing, grooming, and growing their base — literally evangelizing them — for fifty years (since Barry Goldwater).
I do not agree that GOP overreached on Bill Clinton. They lost 4 seats in the first midterm, yes — though still maintaining a comfortable majority. They won the next two presidential elections. They kept control of the House and Senate for four subsequent election cycles (106th through 109th Congresses).
My view of the past fifty years or so is that it is the GOP who has remained faithful and passionate about its dogma, values, and core beliefs. It is we Democrats who have been played and beaten pretty each time we’ve tried to rely on “reason” and betrayed our core values in so doing.
I am far more concerned about the tens of millions of Americans who STILL support Donald Trump. I think those deplorable voters need to be swamped by bring new voters into play. I think we do that be by doubling down on, rather than hiding from, our core values.
I think that our passion about the rule of law must be at the core of our beliefs. There is ample evidence (well beyond probable cause) that this administration has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” — and arguably even treason.
That’s why I think it’s imperative that we begin impeachment hearings NOW in order to put that evidence in the public domain. The reason we will never have “our own version of Benghazi” is that ALL of the evidence showed that there was nothing improper about Ms. Clinton’s role in Benghazi. That is exactly the inverse of what the evidence shows about Mr. Trump.
The fact that the GOP invented pretexts to abuse their power with both the Whitewater investigation and Benghazi does not mean that legitimate investigations should be blocked.
Not impeaching him means he can run in 2020 claiming total vindication by the Mueller report.
I’ve said this before, there is no way that he will remain calm and silent during the impeachment hearings. He’ll unravel…..even more.
Screw the Trump base and the Republicans. Democrats need to show the American people that they are willing to do their job, no matter the political consequences. Show some spine, some honesty.
Let’s be reality based. There is a close to zero chance Trump gets impeached prior to the November 2020 election. Near zero chance he resigns or does not get renominated. There is also a stronger chance he gets re-elected then the Democratic nominee due to the structural advantages of the Electoral College and incumbency. We have to recognize all of these realities in order to overcome them.
This means our best and only chance of removing Trump is at the ballot box by nominating a candidate capable of winning back the Obama/Trump voters who defected in 2008 as well as the Obama voters who stayed home or defected to third parties.
What is the purpose of pursuing impeachment if it does not result in the removal of the president? To get the Democrats on record that they think he broke the law and is a bad word on? They already are. What does it accomplish that a censure doesn’t do? I think you are both overestimating the ability of new information to persuade Republican law makers to abandon this presidency.
The problem is not that they and the wider public don’t know he broke the law, the problem is that they do not care. This is a big difference between 2019 and 1974. Nixon was also no longer on the ballot box so impeachment was the only recourse remaining for accountability. Let’s beat Trump. It’s far more likely to occur than impeachment and will be far more satisfying to see.
I do not agree that there is a zero chance.
It’s my hunch that these people are looking for an honest person, with principles, not afraid to do their job, even if it is not politically expedient.
How many Republican Senators do you think will vote for impeachment between now and November 2020? My guess is zero. Certainly nowhere near the 21 required by the Constitution. Impeachment in the house will have the same force of law as any of Paul Ryan’s Obamacare repeals.
Whether it’s more or less politically useful than those symbolic votes is a separate argument, although I would argue it make the election a referendum on Trump’s character again which did not work the last time we tried it. Hang him on how little his economy is helping working people. It’s the record he hung around Hillary and it worked in the states that count.
Senators do not vote to impeach. How many will vote to remove Trump? None, not one. Not even that spineless turd Mitt Romney…
All the more reason to vote in a Democrat for the White House and flip a few senate seats, starting with the one in Maine.
Not quite. I think the independent voter might see this as a referendum on the swamp in Washington D.C. with Trump as the big gator.
I think the real question is “What evidence can the impeachment committee put in front of the public between now and 2020”.
America of 1974 was completely astonished that actual audio tapes of Oval Office conversations and phone calls existed. Surely we would be less surprised to learn that similar recordings are already in the hands of the NSA, CIA, and FBI.
I’m not talking about Donald Trump’s “character”. I’m talking about detailed blow-by-blow evidence showing his direct and personal participation in not just one but multiple conspiracies. If America is so jaded that even that does not persuade Senators to vote to remove Mr. Trump then the game is over anyway — if that’s the result, then representative democracy in America has failed.
We’ve gone around this argument about the economy “helping working people” a gazillion times. That isn’t the record he “hung around Hillary”. The way he got those working class votes in MI, WI, and PA was to say to working-class people:
– Blacks cause your pain
– Uppity women cause your pain
– Liberals cause your pain
That was the core of his “message”. That caused an avalanche of racist white men to turn out and vote in those states. For whatever reasons, the avalanche of urban black and minority voters in those same states that turned out for Barack Obama did not turn out for Ms. Clinton.
The hard-core Donald Trump “base” voters that I’ve met — starting in 2016 and continuing today — believe that Donald Trump is “raised up by God” to “save America” from “Liberal atheists.” Those voters will not pay the tiniest bit of attention to ANY Democratic campaign. They just won’t.
I think that Mr. Trump is so divisive and so alienating that there just aren’t any “undecided” voters. I think the 2020 election will be determined by new voters.
Impeachment is a function of the House of Representatives and not the Senate so I think you mean how many Republican Senators will vote for conviction…
…Well, on that question the answer depends upon contingencies..
On a secret ballot: all of them.
On a public vote: none of them.
Sad, but true.
“What is the purpose of pursuing impeachment if it does not result in the removal of the president?” You presume the outcome you’re trying to show.
I categorically reject your premise. Should the Democrats choose to pursue it — and especially if the evidence supports it — there is a near 100% chance that Mr. Trump can be impeached. It takes a majority vote of the House and the Democrats hold a majority in the house.
The challenge is to gain the needed votes in the Senate. The scenario that I find most likely is that the impeachment hearings put compelling evidence of multiple offenses on the table. In that case, the 2020 Senatorial election might well be a referendum on whether those GOP Senators pay attention to that compelling evidence. I hope that THAT scenario is at least toss-up.
For me, this is one of those issues where doing the right thing is more important than any electoral calculus based on guessing the outcome. I can tell you, because I was there, that in 1973, before the process began, NOBODY believed the Democrats could get the number of Senate votes needed to remove Richard Nixon from office. NOBODY.
The Democrats moved ahead with that anyway. It turned out that the evidence WAS there. It turned out that even cynical Republicans acted on that evidence when it was in front of them in black and white.
You and John make fair points. I’ve moved my position. I support holding impeachment hearings for discovery purposes to inform the American voter what their president is doing illegally. That is the constitutional duty of Congress. I want to be clear that I am convinced only the voters can remove this President now.
I think hearings are called for. I wouldn’t take anything off the table. They should be real hearings, not show hearings.
I also wonder, JC, if you are not confusing impeachment with conviction, upthread.
I think John and I confused each other on this one. I understand the difference, but I do think a lot of people conflate impeachment with removal from office. I think an impeachment vote in the House that will not lead to the conviction and removal of the President in the Senate is the textbook definition of a symbolic vote that does not change anything on the ground. There are few swing voters who will be move by such a vote, who might be moved by a campaign centered around populist economics.
I do think I confused an impeachment vote with impeachment hearings, and want to be clear that hearings may lead to important information that can assist in other criminal investigations and may even lead to something more substantial. Those are worth it.
I appreciate the clarification.
I think I’m still not on the same page with you about a failed impeachment. In my view, it all hinges on the evidence.
If the evidence is compelling, then I think that an impeachment MUST be brought. If impeachment resolutions, supported by evidence, are rejected by Senate Republicans in the political version of “jury nullification”, I think it’s important for that to be on the record.
I like to think that such a vote will forever ever be a stone around the necks of the corrupt demagogues who cast it.
I really think that influencing swing voters is distraction and a rathole. I think those are a vanishing breed. Beyond that, I think that any voter who embraces the GOP in the 2020 campaign is already a lost cause. I react the same way to medical doctors who also proclaim their belief in young-earth creationism or geneticists who reject Darwin’s theory on religious grounds. The GOP is so flagrantly and blatantly corrupt, dishonest, ignorant, and superstitious (never mind plain old venal greed) that I’m just not interested in courting ANY voter who still proclaims their support for it.
I suggest that our most likely path to winning the presidency in 2020 is to turn out new Democratic voters.
I like your reasons for impeachment. But you offer no equally compelling argument for letting Pelosi decide. She is not the ethical and wise leader you hope for.
In every instance in which I’ve studied Nancy Pelosi closely she has, indeed, demonstrated herself to be both ethical and wise. You’ll have to provide more compelling evidence than assertion to convince me otherwise.
I’m not sure I see the relevance of “ethical and wise”. My complaint is different from that.
There was compelling evidence that the George W. Bush administration ordered kidnapping, torture, murder, and abuse from the Oval Office. That evidence was widely known in January of 2007, when Ms. Pelosi first became Speaker.
Ms. Pelosi chose to not pursue any congressional investigation into those serious crimes. She claimed then, as she does now, that we have higher priorities. I think she was wrong then and wrong now. I don’t accuse of her not being ethical or wise.
I disagree with her values and therefore priorities. I think that the world is a far worse place after that 2006 choice because America knew that our leaders committed war crimes and did nothing about it. I think that set the stage for the abuses of the current administration.
I think the Democratic congress accomplished literally nothing between 2006 and 2008. So I think the result of Ms. Pelosi’s decision was to ignore serious crimes in exchange nothing at all, with the possible exception of some fleeting rise in day-to-day opinion polling (and perhaps resulting Democratic Party campaign contributions).
I think that the stakes are much higher today. If the abuses of this administration are ignored, then I think America will NEVER repair the resulting damage.