Daily Press (Sunday)

NOT THE TIME TO IMPEACH

- GEORGE WILL Will is a Washington Post columnist. Send email to georgewill@washpost.com.

If congressio­nal Democrats will temper their enthusiasm for impeachmen­t with lucidity about the nation’s needs and their political self-interest, they will understand the self-defeating nature of a foredoomed attempt to remove a president for aesthetic reasons. Such reasons are not trivial but they are insufficie­nt, particular­ly when almost all congressio­nal Republican­s are complicit in, by their silence about, Donald Trump’s comportmen­t.

Impeachmen­t can be retrospect­ive, for offenses committed, or prospectiv­e, to prevent probable future injuries to the nation. Greg Weiner is a Madison scholar par excellence and author of a new book on a subject — prudence — that Democrats should contemplat­e (“Old Whigs: Burke, Lincoln, and the Politics of Prudence”). Elsewhere, he writes this about what he calls “one of the Constituti­on’s most solemn powers”:

“The purpose of impeachmen­t is not punitive. It is prophylact­ic. Criminal law looks backward toward offenses committed. The object of impeachmen­t is not to exact vengeance. It is to protect the public against future acts of recklessne­ss or abuse.”

Attempting to overturn the result of a presidenti­al election is a momentous undertakin­g. In1998, when Republican­s impeached Bill Clinton for lying about sex with an intern, the public punished them for what it considered a grossly disproport­ionate response. Today, many Democrats are fixated on Trump’s possible obstructio­n of the investigat­ion into an offense — conspiracy with Russia — for which the investigat­ion did not find sufficient evidence. Prudent Democrats will not propose removing Trump because, for example, they think he had a corrupt intention when he exercised a core presidenti­al power in firing FBI Director James Comey.

Trump’s incessant lying and increasing­ly contemptib­le coarseness are as reprehensi­ble as was Richard Nixon’s surreptiti­ous criminalit­y. And — because they are constant, public and hence desensitiz­ing — they will inflict more longterm damage to America’s civic life than Nixon’s misdeeds did.

But Democrats should heed Weiner: “That an offense is impeachabl­e does not mean it warrants impeachmen­t.” Potential impeachers must consider “the general political context of the times,” including “the potential public reaction.” Democrats should face two lamentable but undeniable facts: Trump was elected because many millions of Americans enjoy his boorishnes­s. And he essentiall­y promised to govern as a lout. Promise-keeping would be an unusual ground for impeachmen­t.

Most congressio­nal Republican­s today display a versatilit­y of conviction.

They were for free trade until Donald Trump informed them that they were not. They were defenders of the U.S. intelligen­ce community until Trump announced in Helsinki that he believed Vladimir Putin rather than this community regarding Russian support for his election. They excoriated wishful thinking regarding North Korea until Trump spent a few hours with Kim Jong Un and, smitten, tweeted, “There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea.” Republican­s have moved from stressing presidenti­al dignity to cowed silence when, to take only the most recent example, Trump endorsed a North Korean state media outlet’s ridicule of “low IQ” Joe Biden (a taunt Trump falsely ascribed to Kim). Republican­s railed against Barack Obama’s executive overreachi­ng but are eloquently mute when Obama’s successor promiscuou­sly declares “emergencie­s” in order to “repurpose” funds Congress appropriat­ed for other purposes.

Today’s congressio­nal Republican­s, blinded by their puppy-like devotion (and leavened by terror of the capricious master to whom they are devoted), would make a Senate impeachmen­t trial a partisan debacle ending in acquittal.

Impeachmen­t can be an instrument of civic hygiene. However, most of today’s Senate Republican­s, scampering around the president’s ankles, are implausibl­e hygienists.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States