What Was Your Position When It Came Time to Decide Whether to Impeach President Trump?

It is striking for me to be reading right now Brenda Wineapple’s new book, The Impeachers:  the Trial of Andrew Johnson and the Dream of a Just Nation.  I’m not far enough in it yet to be able to understand the tension which the members of the House of Representatives and then the Senate faced in whether to vote for impeachment of Andrew Johnson.  The substantive bases for voting for impeachment were readily apparent:  Johnson’s outright opposition (and vetoing; his vetoes were overriden) to legislation protecting the rights of the newly freed African-Americans and his violation of the Tenure of Office provision (by trying to remove Secretary of War Stanton from office).

However, quite apart from the substantive issue, there was the political issue,  a big one, as to whether, for the very first time, impeachment proceedings should be launched against the President of the United States. 

In due course, the charges were agreed to by a majority of the House of Representatives but ultimately failed in the Senate to achieve the required two-thirds majority—by a single vote.

Substantively, for me, there is no doubt that President Trump obstructed the investigation of Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in our election.   It is clear to most legal and prosecutorial authorities that, if the charges had been levied against anyone other than the President of the United States, that person would have been indicted.

The decision which Democratic legislators are facing appears in the main to be a political one.  That is would moving ahead with impeachment proceedings increase or lessen the likelihood of President Trump’s being re-elected in 2020?

As to what we can be virtually certain of, impeachment charges, if agreed to by a majority in the House, would fail in the Senate to achieve the required two-thirds majority.  

Thus, the question really is:  substantively (in terms of doing what’s right) and politically (in terms of increasing or decreasing the likelihood of Trump’s re-election), should impeachment proceedings be pursued in the House?

As to whether proceeding with impeachment proceedings would increase or decrease Trump’s chances of re-election, the short answer is:  we don’t know. 

 I would argue that almost all people who already support Trump will not be materially influenced by the impeachment proceedings.  They’ll stay with him.  

And those who are opposed to Trump—especially his character—will have their beliefs affirmed by the proceedings.  

As to those in the middle--of whom there are very few-- I don’t believe we can predict how many would move one way or the other.  I do not believe this should be a consideration.

Decades from now, people will be writing books like Brenda Wineapple is today about the debate and the outcome of that debate as to whether to impeach President Trump.  Individual names will be identified with the different positions and they will be acclaimed or declaimed based on the position they took. 

I would want to be one of those identified as having  advocated proceeding with impeachment proceedings. 

 Why?  Because I believe the evidence indicates that President Trump’s conduct falls within the guidelines justifying impeachment as provided in Article A II, Section 4, that “a federal officer can be impeached for treason, bribery, or a high crime or misdemeanor.”

I believe President Trump’s attempts to obstruct justice are so flagrant and so numerous as detailed in the Mueller report that failure to proceed with impeachment proceedings would be an ultimate abdication of intellectual and moral integrity. I say this especially knowing that for any other individual an indictment almost certainly would have been issued. 

I do not see any substantive or political rationale sufficiently important or persuasive to justify failure to proceed with this inquiry.