New York Times: The Inevitability of Impeachment

[teach1st]

The Inevitability of Impeachment
By Elizabeth Drew, December 27, 2018

An impeachment process against President Trump now seems inescapable. Unless the president resigns, the pressure by the public on the Democratic leaders to begin an impeachment process next year will only increase. Too many people think in terms of stasis: How things are is how they will remain. They don’t take into account that opinion moves with events.

Whether or not there’s already enough evidence to impeach Mr. Trump — I think there is — we will learn what the special counsel, Robert Mueller, has found, even if his investigation is cut short. A significant number of Republican candidates didn’t want to run with Mr. Trump in the midterms, and the results of those elections didn’t exactly strengthen his standing within his party. His political status, weak for some time, is now hurtling downhill.

The midterms were followed by new revelations in criminal investigations of once-close advisers as well as new scandals involving Mr. Trump himself. The odor of personal corruption on the president’s part — perhaps affecting his foreign policy — grew stronger. Then the events of the past several days — the president’s precipitous decision to pull American troops out of Syria, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis’s abrupt resignation, the swoon in the stock market, the pointless shutdown of parts of the government — instilled a new sense of alarm among many Republicans.

The word “impeachment” has been thrown around with abandon. The frivolous impeachment of President Bill Clinton helped to define it as a form of political revenge. But it is far more important and serious than that: It has a critical role in the functioning of our democracy.

More

[jimlup]

1. The problem is that if you are going to arrest the king ...

you had better be prepared to behead the king. We don't have the votes. Until we do we should not impeach.

[teach1st]

2. It's the position of the OpEd that the votes will be there

I don't know if the votes will be there or not, but I think we'll know by the end of January or February.

I don’t share the conventional view that if Mr. Trump is impeached by the House, the Republican-dominated Senate would never muster the necessary 67 votes to convict him. Stasis would decree that would be the case, but the current situation, already shifting, will have been left far behind by the time the senators face that question. Republicans who were once Mr. Trump’s firm allies have already openly criticized some of his recent actions, including his support of Saudi Arabia despite the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and his decision on Syria. They also openly deplored Mr. Mattis’s departure.

[jimlup]

3. Perhaps but why not wait until Mueller's report is in?

if it is totally damning - which it may be - then maybe time to strike. Thanks... I'll read the article.

[3Hotdogs]

4. You are asking the Repub Reps and Senators to put honor and well being of the nation above

self interest and political stature.

They would be worried about not surviving a primary challenge.

Can you picture McTurtle even allowing a vote to convict (or not) to proceed?