Learning from history
"Those who cannot learn from the past are doomed to repeat it" - George Santayana
There are many people who will begin rejoicing the moment that any member of the House of Representatives introduces Articles of Impeachment against Donald J. Trump. John Dean, who was Richard M. Nixon's White House Counsel was on CNN after the release of the Mueller court filings on Friday. He said:
"I think what this totality of today's filings show that the House is going to have little choice, the way this is going, other than to start impeachment proceedings."
The late Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill points out in his autobiography Man of the House that a resolution calling for impeachment of any government official is by definition, a "privileged" resolution. That makes it much easier to force a vote on that resolution. The subject arose 45 years ago when Father Robert Drinan (D-MA) introduced a resolution into the House calling for the impeachment of President Nixon. Not for the involvement of the White House in the Watergate scandal, but because of the secret bombing of Cambodia at Nixon's direction.
Tip O'Neill was the Speaker of the House at the time. He still holds the record for the longest uninterrupted period of time holding that position. He and the other members of the Democratic leadership were rightly concerned about the timing of Drinan's resolution.
The problem was, it was premature. And because of it being a privileged resolution, under the House rules at the time, any member of the House could force an immediate vote on the measure. None of the Democrats in the House would have done so, but the leadership was concerned that a smart Republican might do just that. Speaker O'Neill wrote about that possibility in the aforementioned autobiography.
"We could certainly see to it that no Democrat would bring it (Drinan's impeachment resolution) up, but who knew what the Republicans might try. If I had been in their shoes, I would have brought up Drinan's resolution immediately, because an early, overwhelming vote against impeachment would have been an effective insurance policy against having to vote on a similar resolution at a later date. If it ever came up, the Republicans could legitimately say, 'Why bother? We've already been through this.'"
* * *
The Democratic majority in the House that takes control next month would do well to learn from this lesson. A premature resolution calling for the impeachment of Donald J. Trump could easily backfire.
Even if such a resolution did pass, the probability of his being found guilty by a 2/3rds majority in a U.S. Senate firmly in control of the Republican party would be almost nil; with the evidence currently available.
With the loss of two seats in the Senate, there will be 45 Democrats, two Independents and 53 Republicans in the "upper house." To get 67 votes, even with all 45 Dems and both Independents, 20 of those 53 Republicans would have to vote to impeach a member of their party.
Back in February of 1999, there were 45 Democrats in the Senate when the votes were held on the two articles of impeachment against President Clinton. All 45 voted not guilty. That made whatever the Republican votes were irrelevant.
I challenge anyone to find 20 Republicans in the Senate who would vote to impeach Trump based on what we know now. With the evidence available now, it would be political suicide for any Republican to vote to impeach Trump; when they run for reelection. It might be political suicide for a Senate Democrat representing a "purple" state to case a "guilty" vote.
* * *
The incoming Democratic leadership needs to exercise patience. Work on the key issues that the people want you to work on. Addressing the inequality of income and wealth. Ensure that every American has access to healthcare. Fulfill the promises you made during the campaign.
Let the Mueller investigation run until it reaches the end of the evidence. Then it will be time to see if it is feasible to successfully impeach Donald Trump.
There are many people who will begin rejoicing the moment that any member of the House of Representatives introduces Articles of Impeachment against Donald J. Trump. John Dean, who was Richard M. Nixon's White House Counsel was on CNN after the release of the Mueller court filings on Friday. He said:
"I think what this totality of today's filings show that the House is going to have little choice, the way this is going, other than to start impeachment proceedings."
The late Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill points out in his autobiography Man of the House that a resolution calling for impeachment of any government official is by definition, a "privileged" resolution. That makes it much easier to force a vote on that resolution. The subject arose 45 years ago when Father Robert Drinan (D-MA) introduced a resolution into the House calling for the impeachment of President Nixon. Not for the involvement of the White House in the Watergate scandal, but because of the secret bombing of Cambodia at Nixon's direction.
Tip O'Neill was the Speaker of the House at the time. He still holds the record for the longest uninterrupted period of time holding that position. He and the other members of the Democratic leadership were rightly concerned about the timing of Drinan's resolution.
The problem was, it was premature. And because of it being a privileged resolution, under the House rules at the time, any member of the House could force an immediate vote on the measure. None of the Democrats in the House would have done so, but the leadership was concerned that a smart Republican might do just that. Speaker O'Neill wrote about that possibility in the aforementioned autobiography.
"We could certainly see to it that no Democrat would bring it (Drinan's impeachment resolution) up, but who knew what the Republicans might try. If I had been in their shoes, I would have brought up Drinan's resolution immediately, because an early, overwhelming vote against impeachment would have been an effective insurance policy against having to vote on a similar resolution at a later date. If it ever came up, the Republicans could legitimately say, 'Why bother? We've already been through this.'"
* * *
The Democratic majority in the House that takes control next month would do well to learn from this lesson. A premature resolution calling for the impeachment of Donald J. Trump could easily backfire.
Even if such a resolution did pass, the probability of his being found guilty by a 2/3rds majority in a U.S. Senate firmly in control of the Republican party would be almost nil; with the evidence currently available.
With the loss of two seats in the Senate, there will be 45 Democrats, two Independents and 53 Republicans in the "upper house." To get 67 votes, even with all 45 Dems and both Independents, 20 of those 53 Republicans would have to vote to impeach a member of their party.
Back in February of 1999, there were 45 Democrats in the Senate when the votes were held on the two articles of impeachment against President Clinton. All 45 voted not guilty. That made whatever the Republican votes were irrelevant.
I challenge anyone to find 20 Republicans in the Senate who would vote to impeach Trump based on what we know now. With the evidence available now, it would be political suicide for any Republican to vote to impeach Trump; when they run for reelection. It might be political suicide for a Senate Democrat representing a "purple" state to case a "guilty" vote.
* * *
The incoming Democratic leadership needs to exercise patience. Work on the key issues that the people want you to work on. Addressing the inequality of income and wealth. Ensure that every American has access to healthcare. Fulfill the promises you made during the campaign.
Let the Mueller investigation run until it reaches the end of the evidence. Then it will be time to see if it is feasible to successfully impeach Donald Trump.
posted by me at 9:35 AM
<< Home