The Day

A rotten week for MAGA stunts

- JENNIFER RUBIN The Washington Post

MAGA House Republican­s would rather do anything but their jobs. They would rather indulge right-wing media consumers with baseless impeachmen­ts, motions to vacate the speaker’s chair (again!), fruitless hearings and parroting Russian propaganda. None of these activities serves the interests of the voters; none improves U.S. national security. For these minions of Donald Trump, chaos and paralysis appear to be the goal. Fortunatel­y for the country, Democrats have figured out how to short-circuit the antics and humiliate Republican­s.

My Post colleague Aaron Blake described the Republican­s’ impeachmen­t of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for his handling of the U.S.-Mexico border as “troubled from the start — in ways that sharply undercut the claim that Democrats are derelict in shrugging off an impeachmen­t trial.” Additional­ly, Blake wrote, many Republican­s admitted that “Mayorkas’s actions weren’t impeachabl­e” and that “the party wound up lacking complete unity in both chambers in historic ways.”

Problems started in the House. The Republican­s’ star legal witness and an even smattering of House and Senate Republican­s conceded that there was no constituti­onal basis for impeaching Mayorkas. Jonathan Turley, a frequent Trump legal defender, readily acknowledg­ed, “I don’t think they have establishe­d any of those bases for impeachmen­t . ... The fact is, impeachmen­t is not for being a bad Cabinet member or even a bad person. It is a very narrow standard.” Republican­s never remotely reached the constituti­onal standard of “high crimes and misdemeano­rs.”

In February, not long before announcing his retirement, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) wrote in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal that “incompeten­ce doesn’t rise to the level of high crimes or misdemeano­rs.” He added that “if we are to make underenfor­cement of the law, even egregious underenfor­cement, impeachabl­e, almost every cabinet secretary would be subject to impeachmen­t.” When the impeachmen­t vote came, Gallagher’s irrefutabl­e reasoning drew only two other Republican “no” votes.

In the Senate on Wednesday, few expected the impeachmen­t to go anywhere. Several Republican­s openly disparaged the effort. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) affirmed there was no constituti­onal basis for Mayorkas’s impeachmen­t, yet voted against dismissing the unconstitu­tional measure for fear of creating a bad precedent(!). Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) voted “present” on one of the two groundless articles:

She most certainly could have determined the charge did not meet the standard of “high crimes and misdemeano­rs,” but a solid display of independen­ce on an impeachmen­t vote was, perhaps, too much to ask.

In any event, Democrats — including moderates such as Sens. Joe Manchin III (W.Va.) and Jon Tester (Mont.) — were in no mood to indulge Republican­s. Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) understood that conducting a full-blown trial would give undeserved credence to the House’s stunt. “The charges brought against Secretary Mayorkas fail to meet the high standard of high crimes and misdemeano­rs,” he said. “To validate this gross abuse by the House would be a grave mistake and could set a dangerous precedent for the future.”

In dismissing the articles of impeachmen­t with a party-line vote, Senate Democrats ignored crocodile tears from the likes of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — who voted against the most meritoriou­s impeachmen­t in history following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot — that dismissing an impeachmen­t before trial would create a bad precedent (unlike letting an insurrecti­onist off the hook?).

Schumer deserves credit for nipping in the bud the GOP-controlled House’s abuse of power.

When Republican­s blatantly lie, disregard their oaths and — to borrow a phrase — weaponize government, Democrats have an obligation to call them out. That entails refusing to take Republican antics seriously. When hearings and investigat­ions obviously lack good faith, the Democrats can uphold the stature of Congress by simply walking away and refusing to play these games.

For good measure last week, the incomparab­le Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, took a verbal sledgehamm­er to Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), derided even by his own side for utterly failing to come up with anything remotely incriminat­ing in his strictly partisan impeachmen­t inquiry into President Biden.

The inquiry has been repeatedly and thoroughly discredite­d. Even now, Comer cannot figure out what “crime” he is investigat­ing. And further still, Comer cannot admit failure.

Raskin’s tongue-lashing does more than provide emotional satisfacti­on to Democrats fed up with reckless Republican antics (although no one should dismiss the value of an occasional dollop of Schadenfre­ude). In a media environmen­t in which Comer’s farce is, in some corners, treated as though it were a legitimate oversight hearing, Democrats must go out of their way to draw bright lines.

Democratic partisans often find fault with their politician­s for being “too nice” or “lacking a killer instinct.” Whatever the merits of their past complaints (e.g., leaving the filibuster in place), they should acknowledg­e that Democratic lawmakers — especially those in the minority of a chaotic, feckless House — have learned a thing or two over the past couple of years.

Democrats have learned to give Republican­s the respect they deserve — which, often, is none.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States