peacefare.net

Too many good reasons to impeach, but he won’t

This is one of the last cyberspaces on earth where you would expect to find a video of Kevin McCarthy, California Republican and Minority Leader in the House. But here is his speech on impeachment today:

McCarthy is clear that the attack on the Capitol was undemocratic, violent, and criminal, aimed at interrupting the constitutionally required certification of Electoral College votes. He states there is no evidence of left-wing Antifa involvement. He says the President bears responsibility for the attack on the Capitol, and criticizes his failure to try to stop it. He says Joe Biden won the election and will be sworn in as President next week. To all of that I say: yes.

His main complaint is that no investigation has been conducted nor hearings held, though the facts adduced in the article of impeachment are all well-known and public. He claims a vote to impeach would further divide the nation, even though he knows that half dozen, or maybe more, Republicans will vote in favor of impeachment, as will the entire majority caucus. Instead of impeachment, he prefers a fact-finding commission and a censure resolution, neither of which he can convince Democrats to vote for.

The weight of the arguments in the two previous paragraphs weighs in favor of impeachment. McCarthy nevertheless is leading the House Republican charge against it, including false allegations from members of his own caucus that Biden did not win and that the Democrats advocated violence during the Black Lives Matter demonstrations.

In conclusion, McCarthy calls for an end to polarization, making reference to the fraught transition from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson in 1801. But he ignores the fact that Adams conceded, which Trump has not. He also ignores the fact that President-elect Biden has, like Jefferson, asked his supporters to put aside division and preached forgiveness. Trump has ignored that appeal.

McCarthy wants unity. I know where he can find it: in a vote, based on the arguments he presents, in favor of impeachment.

Twist in the wind: fast impeachment, delayed trial

Why would anyone want to impeach President Trump during his last week or so in office?

There are good reasons, over and above the obvious need for accountability.

1. To use as leverage to get something better. Resignation or removal of his authority via the 25th Amendment are preferable, but the Republicans aren’t going to force things down those roads without the threat of something worse. The threat of impeachment doesn’t appear to be working yet, but there is no way of knowing whether it will without proceeding.
2. To hang the Damocles sword over his head. Trump is already doing bad things to try to limit Biden’s governing options: the auction of Arctic drilling rights, designation of the Houthis as terrorists (which will limit humanitarian aid to a lot of Yemenis) as well as Cuba as a state sponsor (for its support to Venezuela’s President Maduro). He could do still do far worse in his last days in office: pardon himself and his family as well as the Capitol rioters, encourage a riot at the Inauguration, and attack Iran are three of the more obvious. He is much less likely to pull stunts like these if impeachment is already a done deal and only lacks confirmation in the Senate for conviction.
3. To limit his options after he leaves office. The same applies after January 20. He could still then encourage a seditious insurrection by his supporters. He could also give Russia valuable intelligence in exchange for real estate financing or even the offer of a hotel project in Moscow, which he has long coveted. And of course he could try to run again for office. All these and other possibilities are less likely if a Senate trial is a real and present danger to him.

So there are good reasons to impeach Trump quickly, but not to try to convict him quickly. As things stand, there is no reason to believe that the 17 or so Republican senators needed to convict if everyone turns up to vote will be available. Nor is there good reason after January 20 to preoccupy the Senate with a trial in addition to pushing Biden’s agenda, which will be harder if the Republicans hold vital votes on conviction and dig in their heels. Best to get impeachment done but then slow the process to a crawl and keep the threat of conviction in reserve.

It is even arguable that the provisions of the 14th Amendment would apply in practice without a formal conviction:

No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. 

Would any political party want to risk nominating for the presidency someone already impeached for having given aid and comfort to those engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States?

I suppose the answer might be yes: the Republican Party of Ronna McDaniel and Donald Trump might do that. But the odds of winning an election with such a candidate seem to me minimal. The Damocles sword would still remain over his head.

So on balance, it would be wise to impeach, quickly. But there is no need to proceed with the trial in the Senate until the votes there appear to be available. Let Donald twist in the wind.