Las Vegas Review-Journal (Sunday)

Democrats chart unpreceden­ted course

-

After House Democrats on Thursday voted to move ahead with their effort to overturn the 2016 presidenti­al election, Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave up the game. Attempting to convey the gravity of their predicamen­t, Ms. Pelosi intoned with a straight face that, “It’s a sad day because nobody comes to Congress to impeach the president.”

In fact, Democrats — including many new House members who did indeed campaign on removing President Donald Trump — have been planning for this day from the moment Hillary Clinton faced the stunning realizatio­n in the wee hours of Nov. 9, 2016, that her coronation had been canceled. This wholly partisan course of action was further cemented when Democrats regained control of the House after the 2018 balloting.

It’s now a virtual certainty that House Democrats will impeach the president. The charges remain a moving target, and Democrats have lurched from outrage to outrage — faux Russian collusion, Stormy Daniels, “Access Hollywood,” obstructio­n of justice, the emoluments clause, the president’s impertinen­t comments — before now apparently settling on Ukraine in their latest effort to justify this unpreceden­ted act.

And unpreceden­ted it is. Three previous times, the House has moved to open an impeachmen­t inquiry into a sitting president. All three times, members of both parties were on board.

In 1998, the lower chamber, in GOP control, passed such a resolution against Democrat Bill Clinton, with 31 Democrats voting in favor. In 1973, a Democratic House began the process against Republican Richard Nixon with almost complete support from minority Republican­s. Finally, in 1868, a Republican House, by a 3-to-1 margin and with bipartisan support, brought articles of impeachmen­t against Democrat Andrew Johnson.

Yet on Thursday, not a single Republican sided with Ms. Pelosi on impeachmen­t — and two Democrats defected. For the first time in the nation’s history, impeachmen­t will be used as a purely partisan instrument with which to bludgeon a duly elected president — and all less than a year before a national election.

To make matters worse, Democrats have made clear that they intend to ignore pesky details such as due process and transparen­cy. Nothing in the Constituti­on prevents the House majority from crafting its own guardrails for impeachmen­t proceeding­s, but Democrats seem intent on denying the president even basic legal protection­s. Thursday’s resolution only codifies the injustices.

The process so far, Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley A. Strassel noted on Friday, has included “secret hearings, the refusal to let Republican­s call witnesses or obtain answers (and) the exclusion of Mr. Trump’s legal counsel from the proceeding­s.” It has also entailed keeping the transcript­s of hearings confidenti­al. This whole charade has so far been an insult to credibilit­y and accountabi­lity.

Let’s also remember that Democrats maintained two decades ago that lying under oath during a legal proceeding and suborning perjury was not an impeachabl­e offense. There was no dispute about Mr. Clinton’s actions. Today, however, they argue that Mr. Trump deserves to be ousted from the Oval Office for an ambiguous phone call to a foreign leader, citing the nexus between a corruption investigat­ion that never occurred and U.S. aid that was never withheld.

Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, one of the two Democrats to oppose the impeachmen­t effort, identified the dangers of the House’s current course. “Without bipartisan support,” he noted, “I believe this inquiry will further divide the country, tearing it apart at the seams, and it will ultimately fail in the Senate.”

It was just eight months ago that Ms. Pelosi sounded like Rep. Van Drew. “Impeachmen­t is so divisive to the country,” she told The Washington Post Magazine in March, “that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelmi­ng and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country.” In 2018, she made a similar remark. “Impeachmen­t is a very serious matter,” she said. “If it happens, it has to be a bipartisan initiative.”

The country will survive this overtly partisan and extraordin­ary attempt to remove Mr. Trump from office. The greater danger resides in House Democrats sneering at precedent and transformi­ng the momentous act of impeachmen­t into a casual weapon of convenienc­e used to sate vindictive progressiv­e special interests still cuddling in their safe spaces while raging over Mr. Trump’s 2016 victory. The views expressed above are those of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. All other opinions expressed on the Opinion and Commentary pages are those of the individual artist or author indicated.

 ?? Andrew Harnik The Associated Press ?? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gavels as the House votes 232-196 to pass a resolution Thursday on impeachmen­t procedures.
Andrew Harnik The Associated Press House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gavels as the House votes 232-196 to pass a resolution Thursday on impeachmen­t procedures.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States