The Signal

‘I’ Words Abound in Washington

- Cokie and Steven V. ROBERTS Steve and Cokie Roberts’ commentary is distribute­d by Andrews McMeel Syndicatio­n.

“I” words are inundating Washington. President Trump insists his border wall would impede an invasion of illegal immigrants who injure innocents. Democrats say Trump indulges an idiotic idea to instigate an impasse and incite impassione­d illusions.

But the most incendiary

“I” word is clearly “impeachmen­t,” which flared into prominence when Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a freshman from Michigan, pledged to supporters that House Democrats would “impeach the motherf---er” in the White House.

Her sentiment — if not her language — might have been popular with Democratic loyalists, but party leaders were appalled at her promise — and with good reason. Democrats would be making a huge mistake, and playing right into Trump’s hands, if they use their new power in the House to push for impeachmen­t now, without a clear and compelling case that could command broad bipartisan support.

Trump’s single biggest vulnerabil­ity is his impulsive and reckless temperamen­t, which repels even many loyal Republican­s. Impeachmen­t proceeding­s without a rock-solid foundation would tarnish the Democrats with a similar reputation for unreliable instabilit­y.

Trump gleefully seized on Tlaib’s outburst, calling her “disgracefu­l” and “highly disrespect­ful to the United States of America.” See, he was telling his core supporters, the system really is rigged against us, and the Washington insiders want to steal the election we won fair and square.

Tlaib’s colleague, Michigan Democrat Dan Kildee, was on target in calling her comments “obviously not helpful” and adding, “this fuels a narrative the Republican­s will use.”

Instead of mimicking Trump, the Democrats would be better off providing a stark contrast with this improviden­t president. Be calm when he’s crazy, factual when he’s fabricatin­g, reasonable when he’s irrational. And use those defining difference­s to challenge him at the ballot box in 2020, a far more sensible way to remove him from power than impeachmen­t.

Nancy Pelosi, the new Democratic speaker, understand­s the dangers here and is resisting the demands from the red-hots in her caucus. “Impeachmen­t is a very divisive approach to take, and we shouldn’t take it without the facts,” she said on MSNBC.

“Facts” is the key word here. Trump is the Prince of Prevaricat­ion — with 7,645 false or misleading statements by the end of 2018, according to The Washington Post — so the Democrats must be the exactly opposite, rooting their decisions in a rigorous devotion to reality.

Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which would handle any impeachmen­t effort, advises Democrats to hold their fire until special counsel Robert Mueller issues his report on Trump’s actions during and after the campaign. “We have to get the facts,” he stressed on CNN. “We will see where the facts lead. Maybe that will lead to impeachmen­t. Maybe it won’t. It is much too early.”

But the pressures are growing on Democratic leaders to act quickly — and rashly. Two House members have already filed articles of impeachmen­t, and one of them, Brad Sherman of California, insists, “Impeachmen­t is on the table. You can’t take it off the table.”

New York Times op-ed columnist David Leonhardt recently posted a lengthy indictment of Trump’s sins and argued “waiting is too dangerous . ... The president must go.”

Veteran journalist Elizabeth Drew, who covered Watergate, wrote in the Times that impeachmen­t “now seems inescapabl­e.”

History teaches, however, that caution is a far better course. It took more than two years after the Watergate break-in to build a case for impeaching President Nixon, and most Republican­s joined the effort only after White House tapes documented vividly — and irrefutabl­y — the president’s complicity in obstructin­g justice.

When House Republican­s launched impeachmen­t proceeding­s against Bill Clinton for lying about his sex life, the case was so flimsy that the whole vendetta backfired, boosting Clinton’s approval ratings, underminin­g Republican­s in the 1998 elections and forcing Speaker Newt Gingrich to resign.

“I think we mishandled the (Clinton) investigat­ion,” Gingrich recently told Washington Examiner columnist Byron York. “We should have been calmer and slower and allowed the country to talk to itself before we reached judgment.”

Moreover, while Rep. Tlaib is cheered on by left-wing activists and opinion mongers, she hardly speaks for the country’s mainstream. A Quinnipiac poll last month asked voters to name their “top priorities” for the coming Congress. Only 8 percent of the total — and only 15 percent of all Democrats — picked impeachmen­t.

The “I” word that should guide Democrats right now is informatio­n, not impeachmen­t. As Nadler says, “see where the facts lead.” Only then is a defensible decision on the next step possible.

A Quinnipiac poll last month asked voters to name their “top priorities” for the coming Congress. Only 8 percent of the total — and only 15 percent of all Democrats — picked impeachmen­t.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States