Daily Trust Saturday

US: Can Democrats keep avoiding impeachmen­t talk?

- Anthony Zurcher What does US law say? What are Democrats saying? THREE: Who is impeachmen­t? calling for What are Republican­s saying?

As the swirl of legal drama around Donald Trump grows, it will be increasing­ly difficult for Democrats to avoid direct questions about the “I word” impeachmen­t - even if the topic makes many on the left squirm with discomfort.

On Tuesday Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer stood in a New York courtroom and said then-candidate Trump directed him to commit campaign finance crimes.

If Mr Cohen is to be believed - and his lawyer has produced an audio recording that appears to be at least partial corroborat­ion - it draws the president closer to what is now-documented illegal activity.

There’s an open legal debate about whether a sitting president can be indicted for a crime. The constituti­on and federal law are silent on the issue, but Department of Justice guidelines say no.

The consensus recourse for a president who is accused of serious misdeeds is impeachmen­t by a majority of the House of Representa­tives and a vote to remove by two-thirds of the US Senate.

This, obviously, is both a tall order and an intrinsica­lly political act.

While there has been talk among liberal ranks about impeachmen­t virtually from the day Mr Trump took office, mainstream Democratic politician­s have been extremely uneasy to address the subject directly.

Back in May, Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi called impeachmen­t a “divisive issue” that is “not the path the party should go on” leading up to November’s midterm congressio­nal elections.

Perhaps it’s because Democrats are in the minority in both the House and Senate, so without Republican support such an act would be doomed before it starts. Or it could be a calculatio­n on the part of party officials that, at the moment, polls show their side is much more enthusiast­ic about voting in the upcoming elections.

The thought that the president is in political peril could rally his conservati­ve base and drive them to the polls in equally large numbers.

The conservati­ve effort to impeach Bill Clinton in 1998 is widely viewed as having backfired on the party, leading to an unusually strong mid-term performanc­e by Democrats in a year that, historical­ly, should have favoured the out-of-the-WhiteHouse Republican­s.

For whatever reason, Democrats - for the most part have dodged and ducked. The impeachmen­t question, however, is going to come up with greater frequency.

“I expect that we will confront it,” Democratic Congressma­n David Price of North Carolina told the Raleigh News and Observer on Tuesday.

“At a minimum, we’re going to confront the need to investigat­e a great many things.”

In a television interview on Wednesday morning, Massachuse­tts Senator Elizabeth Warren was repeatedly pressed to say whether she thought the Cohen allegation­s, alone, merited impeachmen­t hearings.

The possible 2020 Democratic presidenti­al front-runner said she wasn’t “nervous” about discussing the topic, but that it was important to let the special counsel investigat­ion conclude before deciding on a “next step”.

“We have an ongoing investigat­ion that has been in place that is much more sweeping, that is much broader than simply the one thing that happened in New York court yesterday,” she told CNN.

“If you really want to look at what Donald Trump has done and what kind of responsibi­lity he should have, let’s get that investigat­ion finished as well.”

That may not be good enough for some on the left. California hedge-fund billionair­e Tom Steyer, a big-money Democratic donor who has spent nearly a year gathering more than five million signatures on a petition calling for the president’s impeachmen­t, said the Cohen and Manafort cases bolster his arguments.

“The evidence continues to mount up,” he said in a video statement on Tuesday. “The question is when will Congress pay attention.”

At a progressiv­e event earlier this month, Mr Steyer accused the Democratic “establishm­ent” of agreeing with him in private, while giving long-winded excuses in public.

“Their message to me and the 5.5 million Americans demanding Donald Trump’s impeachmen­t is that it’s bad politics, it’s off message, and it will galvanize the Republican­s,” he said.

Following the double courtroom drama on Tuesday, Mr Steyer has pledge to spend at least $1m on a new round of television advertisem­ents calling for Mr Trump’s removal. Complicati­ng matters is a certain amount of awakening on the right, among disaffecte­d conservati­ves, to the thought that maybe impeachmen­t is a realistic option.

While the number of Republican officehold­ers publicly saying such a thing can be counted on one hand, pundits and commentato­rs are beginning to chime in.

“I’ve been sceptical about the wisdom and merit of impeachmen­t. Cohen’s guilty plea changes that,” New York Times columnist Brett Stephens tweeted on Tuesday.

“The president is clearly guilty of high crimes and misdemeano­urs. He should resign his office or be impeached and removed from office.”

It seems unlikely in the extreme that Republican­s in Congress would even entertain such notions for the time being.

If their numbers are thinned in a November Democratic mid-term wave, and they conclude they’re better off politicall­y without Mr Trump than with him, that calculus could change.

Whatever the outcome, it’s in the Republican Party’s interests to get impeachmen­t on the table as an election issue as quickly as possible. Democrats, on the other hand, are conflicted - and it shows.

Anthony Zurcher, North America reporter, BBC

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nigeria