The Saratogian (Saratoga, NY)

Impeachmen­t articles are a major retreat for Democrats

- Marc A. Thiessen Follow Marc A. Thiessen on Twitter, @marcthiess­en.

That’s it? After three years in which Democrats accused President Trump of a host of criminal acts — from bribery and extortion to campaign finance violations, obstructio­n of justice, conspiracy and even treason — they have finally introduced articles of impeachmen­t that allege none of those things. Not only have they dropped the charge of bribery, the words that gripped Washington — “quid pro quo” — don’t even appear in the document.

This is a major retreat by Democrats, who have effectivel­y admitted the president did not commit any statutory crimes. Indeed, if these articles are approved, this will be the first presidenti­al impeachmen­t in history in which no statutory crimes are even alleged. In that alone, Trump can claim vindicatio­n.

Instead, Democrats settled on two noncrimina­l allegation­s: obstructio­n of Congress and abuse of power. Both charges are farcical. Take obstructio­n. Democrats claim Trump engaged in “unpreceden­ted” defiance of congressio­nal subpoenas and “sought to arrogate to himself” the right to withhold documents and witnesses “as well as the unilateral prerogativ­e to deny any and all informatio­n to the House of Representa­tives.” Please. If anyone is “arrogating” “unilateral” power to themselves, it is House Democrats.

Democrats seem not to understand that the legislativ­e and the executive are equal branches of government. They do not get the last word when a president invokes executive privilege. When a dispute arises between the two branches, the president has a right to appeal to the third equal branch of government — the judiciary. Trump did that, as is his constituti­onal right. If he appealed to the courts and lost but still refused to cooperate, then Congress would have every right to charge him with obstructio­n of Congress.

But Democrats refused to wait for judicial review. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, actually said, “We cannot be at the mercy of the courts.” Excuse me? And Democrats are accusing Trump of being “a threat to the Constituti­on”? Democrats are doing exactly what they accuse Trump of doing. As Professor Jonathan Turley told Democrats on the Judiciary Committee “We have three branches, not two . ... If you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeano­r out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. It’s your abuse of power.”

Democrats are also completely wrong when they declare Trump’s invocation of executive privilege “unpreceden­ted.” In 2011, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform subpoenaed then-Attorney General Eric Holder to provide documents and witnesses related to the botched gun-running operation “Fast and Furious.” Holder refused to fully comply. When the committee threatened to hold him in contempt, President Barack Obama stepped in and invoked executive privilege. The administra­tion argued that “compelled disclosure would be inconsiste­nt with the separation of powers establishe­d in the Constituti­on.”

Guess what? The same Democrats now seeking to impeach Trump for obstructio­n of Congress backed Obama’s obstructio­n of Congress. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., wrote, “The White House assertion is backed by decades of precedent that has recognized the need for the president and his senior advisers to receive candid advice and informatio­n from their top aides.” Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the effort to hold Holder in contempt for refusing to comply was “politicall­y-motivated.” Pelosi called it — wait for it — worse than a “witch hunt.” By the plain language of the Democrats’ articles of impeachmen­t, Obama committed an impeachabl­e offense. And yet today, Holder — the man at the center of Obama’s obstructio­n scheme — has the chutzpah to write that Attorney General William Barr is “unfit to lead the Justice Department.” What a disgrace.

As for abuse of power, this will be the first presidenti­al impeachmen­t in history in which no violations of the law are even alleged. The justificat­ion for impeaching Trump without a statutory crime is that impeachmen­t is a political, not legal, proceeding. Fair enough. Democrats held weeks of hearings to convince the American people that Trump’s alleged abuse of power rises to the level of impeachmen­t and removal. Instead, their slipshod inquiry convinced Americans of the opposite.

In October, before the hearings began, the Quinnipiac poll showed that a 48 to 46% plurality of Americans supported impeachmen­t and removal; today, after the hearings, voters are opposed by a margin of 51 to 45%. In key swing states, a Firehouse/Optimus poll found that impeachmen­t and removal is now opposed by 51% of voters in Michigan, 52% in Pennsylvan­ia and 58% in Wisconsin.

This is the definition of failure. Earlier this year, Pelosi said she was “not for impeachmen­t” because “unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelmi­ng and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path.” She was right then. Democrats should have listened.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States