A Harvard-Harris poll finds that 65 percent of Americans say Congress should not begin impeachment proceedings against Trump. Sixty percent agree with Attorney General William P. Barr that “the facts and public actions of President Trump did not amount to obstruction of justice, especially since there was no underlying collusion.” And 58 percent believe that “Given the Mueller report . . . we should turn the page on investigations of President Trump.”
To put that in perspective, Trump’s job approval averages 42.9 percent. So there are millions of Americans who don’t approve of Trump, but also don’t approve of the Democrats’ endless investigations.
When Richard Nixon finally decided to resign, he had lost the support of even his most staunch supporters in both chambers of Congress and his overall approval rating was at a mere 24 percent. There was no way out for him: If he didn’t resign, he would have been impeached and removed. By contrast, when the removal trial for Bill Clinton was done in the Senate following his impeachment, his approval ratings reached their highest-ever rate of 73 percent.
Congress began impeachment proceedings against Nixon in February 1974, two years after the break-in at the DNC by his political operatives had occurred. But they didn’t actually put together and approve charges for impeachment in committee until five months later, when his approval ratings plummeted. This was long after the testimony of John Dean and the final release of the White House “smoking gun” tapes confirming his testimony. He resigned on Aug. 9, 1974.
In November 1998, the House kicked off impeachment hearings as a result of the Starr report during the lame duck session following the midterm elections. Then on Dec. 19, 1998, the House voted to impeach Clinton. Clearly, that didn’t work.
Today, Trump and Republicans are betting that if Democrats manage to put together an impeachment vote in the House (which right now only 38 out of 238 Democratic House representatives support), it would fail in the Senate and Trump would benefit like Clinton, rather than Nixon. As a result, Democrats would not only help re-elect Trump in 2020, they would be handing the House back to the Republicans, as well. FiveThirtyEight says the likelihood that there would be a backlash against impeachment is probable.
Would impeachment hurt congressional Democrats in the near term?
Probably.
Since the release of the (redacted) Mueller report, some news and polling organizations have asked the public questions about impeachment.impeachment proceedings,” while others note the possibility of Trump being removed from office.
- Republicans overwhelmingly oppose impeachment (91 percent to 5 percent in a recent NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll that asked whether impeachment hearings should be started in response to the Mueller report).
- Independents oppose impeachment but by a narrower margin than Republicans do (51-40, according to the Marist poll).
- Democrats largely support impeachment (70 percent, in the Marist survey), but there is still a sizable anti-impeachment bloc among Democrats (23 percent opposed).
So at least for now, impeachment doesn’t look like a great idea for Democrats politically — it divides the party, unifies Republicans and pushes independents toward the GOP.
But those who favor impeachment argue that these poll results should not be taken too seriously. “People don’t have preformed opinions about what merits impeachment the way they know their health care sucks or whatever,” wrote Brian Beutler, editor-in-chief of Crooked Media, the company that produces the popular liberal podcast “Pod Save America.” “Support for impeachment has dropped since the Mueller report … because Democratic leaders aggressively crapped all over the idea from the word ‘go.’ Having successfully eroded public support for impeachment, those same leaders can now point to the polling they shaped as a reason not to act.”
Is Beutler right? Maybe. In this era of deep partisan polarization, I would assume that support for impeachment among Democrats would increase if party elites — particularly people who are aligned with the party’s moderate voters like Joe Biden — all started pushing for it. Also, the process itself, which would probably include nationally televised hearings in which Mueller and others described the allegations against Trump in detail, could increase support for impeachment among the public. That’s what happened in the 1970s: Public support for the idea that Richard Nixon should be removed from office surged in 1973 and 1974 as Congress investigated the president and laid out the evidence against him.
Going slow and steady is better than speeding through this process.
This is why Pelosi has argued that everything hinges on making and presenting a compelling case to America, and taking their time in doing so. There’s no good reason to rush things.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Wednesday that impeachment hinges on making a “compelling case” to the American people — and that can only happen if the House committees continue investigating the President and his administration.
She compared the political landscape now to that of former President Richard Nixon’s time, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.
“We have a different scenario now,” she said. “The case has to be very compelling to the American people.”
There are other opinions from those such as Alan Lichtman, who claims that Democrats will not retain the House and will not defeat Trump in 2020 if they don’t push for impeachment now.
“Trump wins again in 2020 unless six of 13 key factors turn against him. I have no final verdict yet because much could change during the next year. Currently, the President is down only three keys: Republican losses in the midterm elections, the lack of a foreign policy success, and the President’s limited appeal to voters,” Lichtman said.
Cillizza, then explained how Lichtman’s test works, “If six or more of the statement are false, the incumbent loses. If less than six are false, the incumbent wins. Simple,” he said.
[...]
“Democrats are fundamentally wrong about the politics of impeachment and their prospects for victory in 2020,” he said. “An impeachment and subsequent trial would cost the President a crucial fourth key — the scandal key — just as it cost Democrats that key in 2000.”
There is also the argument that members of Congress need to declare that they are performing an impeachment inquiry in order to buzzsaw through White House obstruction on their subpoenas. However, they have won in district court on the Deutsche Bank/Capital One case, which shows signs that Trump and Kushner may have been involved in money laundering. The banks have begun to comply and provide documents to Congress. Trump’s foes have won in district court on the Mazars USA LLP case for Trump’s own internal financial documents, which can be compared with Deutsche Bank’s to determine if Trump committed bank fraud as alleged by his former lawyer Michael Cohen. They have reached a deal with the DOJ to gain access to all of the underlying intelligence documents from the redacted Mueller report, and the New York Legislature has voted to allow Trump's state tax returns to be made available to Congress. It’s fair to say that progress is slowly being made, despite the White House’s stonewalling plan. However, they haven't yet broken through on getting former White House lawyer Don McGahn to testify about obstruction, or forcing Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin to release Trump’s federal returns, or getting Mueller to testify in open session—yet.
Opinions vary on this, but ultimately it’s a public relations battle. Those examining the facts have to make the case to the American people, and they have to effectively counter the pro-Trump propaganda coming from the alternative fact faction at the same time.
Congress has been and will continue doing its job for the American people, but they have an uphill battle to make the case that Trump deserves to be removed from office. They have to continue on both tracks, legislating and investigating while educating the American people against the endless stream of distorted right-wing propaganda.
I've previously made the case that if independents cannot be significantly swayed by a sustained investigation and most Republicans remain on the second moon on Mars, Congress should push for censure. This could potentially be achieved on a bipartisan basis and possibly even in both chambers of Congress, since it only requires 50 plus 1 percent. This would allow for a statement condemning Trump’s actions and behavior without allowing the backlash that FiveThrityEight suggests could happen with impeachment. Additionally, it has the benefit of avoiding the other potential pitfall of impeachment if removal happens to fail in the Senate. In other words, the censure scenario would official condemn Trump but wouldn’t allow a would-be President Pence to pardon Trump as soon as he’s out of office so he can’t be prosecuted by the DOJ. There is the likelihood of a self-pardon, and also state prosecution by the New York attorney general, but the best option would be for Trump to face the current federal obstruction and campaign finance violations without the protection of his position in the White House. He needs jail, and IMO nothing less will do. Whatever it takes to get him there, I’m fine with.
If we hoped and expected that Robert Mueller would be the final answer and provide the push needed to get the public to understand the truth about Trump, he has failed to do that, as he was clearly hamstrung by current OLC rules. He is adamant that he will not do what former FBI director James Comey did, which is publicly trash a person whom he has no intention—or ability—to indict.
Congress has to do this job. They have to find a way to move the needle, and they can’t be distracted or deterred by bogus charges that they aren’t passing any laws to help the American people.
Those that have abandoned the needs of the American people for their own craven, partisan gain all belong to one party, and it’s not the Democratic one.