In his New York Times column this morning David Brooks explains why, guilty or not, impeaching Trump would be a mistake:
Donald Trump committed an impeachable offense on that call with the Ukrainian president. But that doesn’t mean Democrats are right to start an impeachment process.
Remember, impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. There is no obligation to prosecute. Congress is supposed to do what is in the best interest of the country. And this process could be very bad for America:
This will probably achieve nothing. To actually remove Trump from office, at least 20 Republican senators would have to vote to convict him. If you think that will happen because of this incident, you haven’t been paying attention to the Senate Republicans over the past two and a half years.
Usually when a leader takes a big risk, it’s because there’s a big upside. But Nancy Pelosi is taking a giant risk and there is little upside. At the end of this process Trump will probably be acquitted by the Senate. He will declare himself vindicated and victorious in his battle against The Swamp. An ugly backlash could ensue — in both parties.
This is completely elitist. We’re in the middle of an election campaign. If Democrats proceed with the impeachment process, it will happen amid candidate debates, primaries and caucuses. Elections give millions and millions of Americans a voice in selecting the president. This process gives 100 mostly millionaire senators a voice in selecting the president.
As these two processes unfold simultaneously, the contrast will be obvious. People will conclude that Democrats are going ahead with impeachment in an election year because they don’t trust the democratic process to yield the right outcome. Democratic elites to voters: We don’t trust you. Too many of you are racists!
Read the whole thing.
I present a counter-argument; that impeachment is a reasonable risk/reward to take (for partisan Democrats)
Let’s start with the maximum downside – it hurts the Democrats with voters; Trump is re-elected, Republicans take the House and keep the Senate.
What did Trump achieve with a R House and Senate in 2017 — very little except a tax cut; because the Republican Party is divided and continues to be divided. That has not changed.
Very likely given another chance; Trump won’t achieve much; voters get exhausted with his scandals, and give Democrats Congress in 2022 and the Presidency in 2024.
On the other hand; what’s the maximum gain? If impeachment drives down Trumps popularity and divides the Republican Party; the Democrats keep the House, takes the Senate and the Presidency. And it’s not a moderate D who is President, but Warren who has taken maximalist policy stands on every issue.
That’s a big chance to do the wish list of Democratic Policy priorities.
Given the limited downside and big potential upside; would you take it?
I think impeachment is a mistake. While Trump is obviously guilty as hell for seeking personal favors from a foreign government in return for US aid, no GOP Senator will vote against him. I cant think of much of anything he would do that they would oppose. The proper course would be to hold 8 investigations to keep it in the news and garner more donations. Or just work to vote him out of office.
Steve
I must be blind. In 2016 we had a Democratic Presidential candidate engaged in pay for play with Communist China. Ditto today, and half the nation wants to rid the country of the man who exposed these people and took on China because he’s not “likableâ€. We need leaders not appeasers and when we get one we can’t handle it.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2017/06/14/433915/trumps-conflicts-interest-china/
Trump came into office as a newbie politician, seasoned businessman. He had spent almost 7 decades of life wheeling and dealing with projects all over the world, along with being a Hollywood staple for many years. He lost fortunes and then gained them back. Any political experience though, arose from donating, socializing, talking about politics via the media and most recently actively supporting candidates like (ironically) Romney, who evolved into a nemesis. Trump basically changed careers instantaneously – from being a billionaire builder to an occupant of the Oval Office – contrasting and alienating himself from his political peers, many of whom wallowed on K Street for years
So, delving into a lifetime of business ventures, now that Trump has suddenly become POTUS, seems mainly aimed at discrediting this newcomer with nuanced flashbacks of contacts and deals representing (maybe) conflicts of interests, in order to cast dispersions on his governance and muddying his presidency.
However, lost in the haze of contempt for this man are changes he has made for the good (at least in the minds of half of the people in the country). Also, brushed aside by the sanctimonious opposition are how many politicians have either quietly enriched or besmirched themselves: doing deals with China like Feinstein’s husband, Biden’s and John Kerry’s sons; Pelosi and dubious insider trading claims; Menendez associated with medicare fraud; Obama changing a school’s qualification for GI bill funding, lowering the value of the school so his pal could buy it, after which he reinstated the school’s ability to accept GI funding; the entire travesty of the Russian Collusion “insurance policy†contrived by various intelligence agencies, DOJ, State Dept. So many slick politicians, so many back room deals, so little transparency or accountability for the majority of misconduct and actual DC elitist crimes until (wait for it) the unwanted DJT breaks into this tight crowd and is slammed by opposition research manufactured in a way thatâ€anything goes,†in driving this man from office (before the people elect him again)!
Addressing “why impeachment is a mistake ….Because what the Democrats are trying to do is “impeach Trump’s personality,†credit for this to Greg Not liking someone’s demeanor or use of language is not a justified reason to impeach a president, or anyone, for that matter.
Trump has never changed from being Trump – his mannerisms, from charming to abrasive. He even uses the same words, over and over again. Reading that transcript was pure Trump, with no evilness lurking, like Democrats are trying to wring out of it. And, isn’t it a coincidence that, several days before the whistleblower (leaker) presented his 2nd hand observations, the rules were changed from 1st hand knowledge to 2nd and 3rd hand to qualify for whistleblower protections. It’s incredible how such things seem to work out, like a well executed game plan!