Thursday, February 11, 2021
PMT: The Impeachment Trial
It turns out that the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6 was even more dangerous than I thought. New video (available at the Washington Post here) shows the narrow escape some lawmakers had.
Looking at this, I realize how fortunate it was that the rioters didn't successful use fire to destroy things. There were bombs found in and around the city linked to the group, but nothing went off and I'm not aware of a major arson.
Some observations on the impeachment trial:
-- The House managers have done a really good job. Democrats can make great prosecutors, it turns out.
-- Meanwhile, Trump's lawyers are awful. More than anything, they seem to lack preparation and focus. There is no coherent messaging, and they seem to just be making stuff as they go along-- kind of like the Trump presidency. As a friend on Twitter noted, it's pretty bad when a guy appears on a courtroom Zoom call as a kitten and doesn't even make the top two for worst appearances by a lawyer on that day.
- Republican Senators' disdain for the process is not only disrespectful to the Senate, but will make them less popular. Pandering to the 35% of the nation that will vote for whoever Trump tells them to isn't a good look. More than anything, it is following rather than leading.
-- The outcome is pretty certain: Republicans will dutifully vote to acquit Trump, and the requirement of a super-majority will make that determinative. But the political outcome in the longer term will be telling; I suspect that they may lose another 3-5% of their base in this mess.
--The House managers are so much better than last time. Very effective. And their use of video has been chilling (and perhaps even changing the calculus of this foregone conclusion).
--I think this is true. In Marbury v. Madison, Madison did not go to court or send representation. The Jefferson admin just ignored the whole case. I will leave it to your interpretation how well that turned out for the administration and the nation, but I think, if I were Trump, I might have followed the Madisonian precedent and just not showed up.
--The House screwed up by focusing on "incitement" in their sole article. I could have written an article I would have voted for. It would have centered on the President violating his oath of office to uphold the Constitution when he attempted to intimidate Congress into setting aside the constitutional process for election and declaring him re-elected by fiat. The most impeachable offense in the history of the presidency. Also, his dereliction of duty as commander-in-chief in not protecting the Capitol, Congress, and the process has come up since--and I certainly agree with that although it is subordinate to his first and most egregious offense (trying to subvert the election). And although the very smart House managers have tried to backfill on this some, the charging document remains fatally flawed.
--The House also screwed up in not soliciting more bipartisan buy-in. They have made this a wholly partisan issue--and, in my view, they probably could have averted that partisan dead end. I am positive there were GOP congressmen who would have come aboard as co-authors of the article and would have probably made it much better but certainly more bipartisan.
--So, for those Republican senators who will vote for impeachment (with all the problems: constitutional ambiguity, partisan food fight, and a mischarged article), I say fine. Vote your conscious. I hear you. You are voting to convict a former president who merits censure. Fine. For those Republican senators who will vote for acquittal (with all the problems and also knowing their constituents favor acquittal), I say fine. Vote your district. I understand your vote.
--One other thing, from my lay perspective, I believe this trial is fully constitutional, a political matter, and unlikely to draw judicial scrutiny. On the other hand, I am not so sure about a Senate sanction that prohibits Donald J. Trump from ever seeking public office again. I am not sure that is constitutional and I imagine it would be subject to adjudication.
I realize I'm guessing, but my bigger point is that an acquittal by 44-45 Republican senators seems more blindly partisan than it should be in this case, and that many of those folks are neither voting their conscience nor representing their state.
: 5:47 PM : 5:55 PM 1) Totally agree with you about the charge. They botched that, and I don't know why.
2) It's constitutional to bar Trump from further office; that's literally in the Constitution, at Article I, Section 3: "Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States...."
<< Home
