Andrew McCarthy of National Review Online admits early in his latest column that he believes President Trump has “committed impeachable conduct.” Nonetheless, the former federal prosecutor questions Democrats’ motives in pushing impeachment now.
In explaining their thinking, Democrats say — as if this were the most natural thing in the world — that there should be minimal interference with confirmation of the new (Democratic) president’s cabinet, so the new administration can get up and running, tending to its aggressive agenda for the first 100 days. Then some time down the road, maybe in May, maybe even later, the speaker will deign to send the impeachment article and the managers over to the Senate for the purposes of prompting a trial. You know, at some time that President Biden, Vice President Harris, and Senator Schumer find advantageous.
That would not be a real impeachment. It would be a partisan stunt.
By acknowledging that there is no urgency to deal with an impeachment trial because Trump will already be gone, Democrats are implicitly conceding that there is no urgency in proceeding with impeachment in the first place.
Just like the Senate trial, the House approval of an impeachment article could wait until Trump leaves office. There is no justification for rashly pushing it through with no normal proceedings, no hearings, no due process, and no debate on the substance and articulation of the allegations. Indeed, I would argue, that there is no imperative to do it at all. The Congress could instead enact a joint resolution of censure that fully and accurately describes President Trump’s misconduct. Such a resolution could even include a finding that Trump would have been subject to impeachment and removal had the behavior not happened so close to the end of his term.
If there must be an impeachment, and there truly is urgency to do it because the Constitution’s defense purportedly demands it, then it should be a real impeachment, not a political exhibition. …
