I don’t ask that question just because of that poll. I’ve been thinking about it for a while.
There’s an assumption that impeachment is politically dangerous — that it endangers Democratic prospects in 2020. This view comes primarily from polls and the “conventional wisdom” of pundits. Even many impeachment supporters frame their support in terms of “doing the right thing” and upholding the Constitution, despite the risks. The concern is based on polls, a perception impeachment will overshadow good issues for Democrats, concern about motivating Trump’s base and Senate conviction will never happen. Let’s take each of these:
- Polls: The Ipsos Reuters Poll, taken on April 18-19, the day of and after the report’s release, shows an 8 point swing toward impeachment — from 49-39 against on March 25-26 — to just 42-40 against now. The same poll shows Trump approval/disapproval dropping from 40/54 to 37/56 from March to April. And that’s before the continuing disclosure of the report’s damning contents. It could be an outlier, but let’s see.
- Issues: This is the “walk and chew gum” argument. Right now there’s a five-ring circus of committees — intelligence, judiciary, oversight, financial services and ways and means. I believe if all committee investigations were consolidated in impeachment, there would be just two main focuses (foci?): impeachment and legislation — easier for the media to cover and the public to concentrate on.
- Rabid Republican Base: They don’t need impeachment to rally them in 2020. They are motivated by the mere existence of Democratic candidates, especially for Trump.
- Senate Acquittal and the Clinton Impeachment: The Mueller Report contains overwhelming evidence for impeachment and conviction, unlike the Starr Report. But remember, the Clinton acquittal came after the 1998 midterms (which Dems won), but before the 2000 Presidential Election (which Dems lost). Impeachment was a large part of why Gore shunned Clinton and picked Lieberman in 2000.
And what about non-Mueller Report impeachable offenses?
- Trump’s Post-Election Russia Actions: I’d include at least one article of impeachment on this — the secret meetings, the Helskinki statement favoring Putin over our intelligence; the secret phone calls; the disclosure of classified information to Russian officials in the White House.
- Trump’s failure to act against foreign intervention in elections: This deserves its own category. What could be more impeachable than failing to “provide for the common defense.”
- Trump’s Saudi Connections: Why is Trump selling nukes to the 9/11 hijacker’s country?
- The SDNY Stormy/McDougal/Cohen hush money (mentioned but not featured by Mueller) — the only case so far in which Trump (“Individual One”) was directly implicated in a crime;
- Deutsche Bank and other financial crimes investigation
- Blatant emoluments clause violations: enabled and encouraged by Trump appointees.
- The Trump Foundation and Trump Organization cases in NY State.
The Political Advantages of Impeachment
Let’s say you are a Republican Senator running in a purple state in 2020, like Sens. McSally (AZ), Collins (ME), Gardner (CO), Ernst (IA). Or vulnerable red state Senators like Cornyn (TX) or Roberts (KS). Or Doug Jones’ opponent in AL. (who might be Roy Moore).Or a Republican House member in a vulnerable district?
Do you want to defend a vote to acquit someone who paid hush money to a porn star, obstructed justice by lying and bullying? Made the Presidency his personal piggy bank, stole from charities, obstructed justice and everything else in and out of the Mueller Report?
I’d go along with multiple committee investigations and censure first, I suppose, but only with a limited time horizon.
Democrats for too long have accepted “conventional wisdom” on issues. The Church of the Savvy attracts too many Democratic parishioners.
The case for impeachment is overwhelming. The risks of impeaching are exaggerated or don’t even exist.
