Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Greg Sargent, WaPo: Democratic equivocation over impeachment is a moral and political disaster
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/19/democratic-equivocation-over-impeachment-is-moral-political-disaster/As the political world digests the shocking scale of corruption, misconduct, and skirting of criminality detailed in the Mueller report, Democrats have been pushing back on the idea that it’s time to initiate an inquiry into the impeachment of Donald J. Trump.
But there’s a key tell lurking in all this pushback: Democrats are not seriously arguing that all the misconduct that has now come to light does not merit an impeachment inquiry.
This is creating a situation that’s shaping up as a moral and political disaster. Yet there’s no indication that Democrats are reckoning with the problems this poses. This, even though the basic dynamics of the situation strongly suggest that initiating an inquiry will grow harder to resist over time, not easier.
By my count, Democrats are offering at least four different rationales for refraining from launching such an inquiry.
-snip-
Embedded in many of these rationales is the idea that the politics of an inquiry are daunting: It will ultimately fail while simultaneously energizing Trump’s base in 2020. Or Democratic overreach risks alienating swing voters.
But even if those are true, these flimsy rationales create their own political problem. The basic posture seems to be that if Democrats wait until the shock of the Mueller revelations dies down, then the question of whether to launch an inquiry will recede with it.
But how can Democrats harbor that hope, while simultaneously pressing forward with multiple investigations of their own? Nadler wants to hear from Mueller and get the full report. Democrats are pursuing Trump’s tax returns, and they have subpoenaed Deutsche Bank and Trump’s accounting firm to access Trump’s finances. It’s at least possible Democrats will get those returns, and aides say they expect cooperation from those outside entities.
All this has left Democrats in the impossible position of hoping the case for impeachment weakens, while simultaneously moving aggressively to establish more wrongdoing, which would strengthen that case. Are Democrats hoping their own investigative efforts don’t succeed in doing that?
The case for launching an inquiry based on what we now know is strong. As Yoni Appelbaum explains, Mueller’s report declares that presidents can, in fact, violate obstruction of justice statutes and amasses extensive evidence that Trump actually did so, while simultaneously declining to reach a prosecution decision. This means only Congress can decide whether Trump will be subject to a process in which he actually can be held accountable. That, in turn, means not launching an inquiry places him above the law.
That’s not all. As Brian Beutler argues, by doing that, Democrats would essentially cede the field to the Trump propaganda machine, which wants to shift the debate into one over whether the “real” crimes were committed by the investigators, with the complicity of Democrats. Thus, not acting now paves the way for more Trumpian abuses of power.
But ultimately, it doesn’t matter so much what I or Appelbaum or Beutler thinks as much as it matters what Democrats think. If they don’t actually believe the known misconduct merits an impeachment inquiry, then they shouldn’t initiate one, make a real case for that, and we’ll have to accept all the consequences that come with it. But if they do actually think one is merited, then stalling is simply untenable.
What is entirely unacceptable at this point is not seriously engaging the question at all.
But there’s a key tell lurking in all this pushback: Democrats are not seriously arguing that all the misconduct that has now come to light does not merit an impeachment inquiry.
This is creating a situation that’s shaping up as a moral and political disaster. Yet there’s no indication that Democrats are reckoning with the problems this poses. This, even though the basic dynamics of the situation strongly suggest that initiating an inquiry will grow harder to resist over time, not easier.
By my count, Democrats are offering at least four different rationales for refraining from launching such an inquiry.
-snip-
Embedded in many of these rationales is the idea that the politics of an inquiry are daunting: It will ultimately fail while simultaneously energizing Trump’s base in 2020. Or Democratic overreach risks alienating swing voters.
But even if those are true, these flimsy rationales create their own political problem. The basic posture seems to be that if Democrats wait until the shock of the Mueller revelations dies down, then the question of whether to launch an inquiry will recede with it.
But how can Democrats harbor that hope, while simultaneously pressing forward with multiple investigations of their own? Nadler wants to hear from Mueller and get the full report. Democrats are pursuing Trump’s tax returns, and they have subpoenaed Deutsche Bank and Trump’s accounting firm to access Trump’s finances. It’s at least possible Democrats will get those returns, and aides say they expect cooperation from those outside entities.
All this has left Democrats in the impossible position of hoping the case for impeachment weakens, while simultaneously moving aggressively to establish more wrongdoing, which would strengthen that case. Are Democrats hoping their own investigative efforts don’t succeed in doing that?
The case for launching an inquiry based on what we now know is strong. As Yoni Appelbaum explains, Mueller’s report declares that presidents can, in fact, violate obstruction of justice statutes and amasses extensive evidence that Trump actually did so, while simultaneously declining to reach a prosecution decision. This means only Congress can decide whether Trump will be subject to a process in which he actually can be held accountable. That, in turn, means not launching an inquiry places him above the law.
That’s not all. As Brian Beutler argues, by doing that, Democrats would essentially cede the field to the Trump propaganda machine, which wants to shift the debate into one over whether the “real” crimes were committed by the investigators, with the complicity of Democrats. Thus, not acting now paves the way for more Trumpian abuses of power.
But ultimately, it doesn’t matter so much what I or Appelbaum or Beutler thinks as much as it matters what Democrats think. If they don’t actually believe the known misconduct merits an impeachment inquiry, then they shouldn’t initiate one, make a real case for that, and we’ll have to accept all the consequences that come with it. But if they do actually think one is merited, then stalling is simply untenable.
What is entirely unacceptable at this point is not seriously engaging the question at all.
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
