Rep. Adam Schiff, the head of the House Intelligence Committee, maintained the curious line of the Democratic leadership this weekend in declaring Trump’s conduct as more serious than Nixon but trying to dampen demands for impeachment. I have written for the last year that the calls for impeachment leading to the midterm elections as a transparent bait-and-switch in the making. As made clear by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, impeachment is not on their “agenda.” Indeed, it is doubtful that the leadership ever wanted to impeach Trump. However, they must look like they want to impeach so Schiff and others are just blaming the expected opposition by Republicans as relieving them of the need to impeach. It doesn’t. While I think this would be a difficult impeachment case given the mixed and incomplete findings of Robert Mueller, that has nothing to do with Schiff and others fulfilling their oaths if they believe impeachable conduct has occurred. Nixon was certain to be impeached when he resigned and Schiff is saying that Trump’s conduct is “far worse.”
The line was apparent last night when Speaker Nancy Pelosi fought back members demanding impeachment proceedings and insisted that they would just continue to investigate out of fear of possible political backlash.
Schiff told host of ABC’s This Week, Martha Raddatz that “The obstruction of justice in particular this case is far worse than anything that Richard Nixon did … so yes, I would say in every way this is more significant than Watergate.”
Then however he relieved himself and the entire Democratic Party of acting on principle to vote on articles of impeachment. It is well known that the party is concerned that such an effort would backlash and a wounded Trump is much better for their political interests than a removed Trump. The solution? Blame the opposition and say that they would not fulfill their oaths:
“We are, unfortunately, in an environment today where the GOP leadership, people like [House Minority Leader] Kevin McCarthy, are willing to carry the president’s water no matter how corrupt or unethical or dishonest the president’s conduct may be. And in those kinds of circumstances, when [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell will not stand up to the president either, it means that an impeachment is likely to be unsuccessful.”
It is that easy. You get to continue to investigate and declare impeachable conduct without actually putting your name to an article of impeachment.
As I have previously written, members should not be able to avoid difficult votes by insisting that other members in the other chambers would likely not fulfill their own oaths. If leadership want to stand on principle in denouncing alleged impeachable offenses, they may want to honor the principles under Article I to declare and vote on such offenses.
Politicians. Principles. It’s not clear that those two words could ever morally co-exist in the same sentence in today’s hyper partisan environment.
At the end of the day, Pelosi is making the smart political decision. The end goal here is simply to end Trump’s presidency by any means possible. Accordingly, the salient strategic question is simply which pathway (investigation, impeachment or some hybrid thereof) offers the greatest risk/reward in terms of achieving that outcome. Pelosi would pounce in a heartbeat on the impeachment bandwagon if she even halfway thought there was a credible bipartisan case to be made and likely recognizes there’s barely a credible partisan case to be made.
Consider that Mueller did not establish or find evidence that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia. On obstruction, you’re left with a novel theory of obstruction that places the onus on finding corrupt intent and as Turley pointed out, there’s simply not a serious basis for obstruction. At best, Dems are left with a partisan Rohrschach test and a highly contentious debate on “difficult Issues of law and fact” as Mueller aptly put it.
Now play “collusion” and obstruction out against the backdrop of impeachment hearings–where’s the plausible pathway that’s going to gain bipartisan traction (ie, gaining R support)? Simply put, there is none as of now. In fact, it’s not even clear that impeachment would pass muster in the House (remember there are moderate D’s in swing districts) and D’s would face the substantial risk that impeachment will backfire in much the say as the Clinton impeachment did.
The day that politicians stand by principle is the day that we know we’ve evolved to a far better place. There’s always hope.
Go ahead, impeach Trump. It will fail. After that Donald Trump will be the worst nightmare the left could ever dream of.
Wait.
Is that a joke?
“Democrat Leadership”
That’s an oxymoronic contradiction in terms, right?
Democrat parasitism, leeching, freeloading, scrounging, sponging, goldbricking, depending and otherwise stealing and spending other people’s money is more like it.
They are sins to Covet and Steal.
Acting on envy and theft are only prescribed by the Communist Manifesto.
The American thesis is freedom and self-reliance.
These leeches should not be in America and their “desires” on the success and property of others certainly should not be indulged.
Congress has merely the power to tax for “…general Welfare…” and merely the power to regulate exchange, trade or “…Commerce among the several states…,” and nothing else – no design, engineering, production or marketing of any industrial or commercial product or private property.
Translation. Nancy is scared spitless of losing her job and her party real leftist extremists . My oh my Comrade Nancy is getting prepped for the torch and all her work for The Party is going to get her is a putsch. over the cliff of best forgotten memories.
Bo Tox
Bo’ Tox
Oh bring back my Bo Tox to me
TO ME