Rather than conceiving plans for the good of the country, the new majority in the U.S. House of Representatives might well be considering the suicide mission of impeaching The Donald.
Multiple news reports suggest the Democrats are suiting up for the death-defying misadventure, despite House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s nixing the crackpot idea some time ago.
Nadler and Steyer
Two commanders leading the uphill charge are Representative Jerry Nadler, the leftist from New York who will run the House Judiciary Committee next session, and billionaire envirocrank Tom Steyer.
Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist overheard Nadler on the phone the other day on a train back from New York. The subject: Impeachment!
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
According to Hemingway, Nadler wants to get Trump and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. First Nadler wants to nail the FBI because “they didn’t even do a half-ass job.” Nadler told his friend that the FBI “didn’t interview 30 witnesses who said, ‘Interview me! I’ve got a lot to say!’”
Then he wants get Kavanaugh for perjury:
He claimed that The Atlantic published an article about the allegations of a third woman. Then he claimed that when Kavanaugh was “asked at a committee hearing under oath when he first heard of the subject, he said, ‘When I’d heard of the Atlantic article.’ But there is an email chain apparently dating from well before that from him about ‘How can we deal with this?’” Nadler told the caller.
That’s a non-starter. The claim that Kavanaugh lied to the committee can’t be true because the New Yorker, which was the source Nadler meant, was the entity that disclosed to Kavanaugh that it would publish a story, as Hemingway noted.
Anyway, even if they could prove Kavanaugh lied, which they can’t, removing him from the court, which they won’t, would merely mean that Trump would appoint “someone just as bad.” Or just as good, perspective depending.
Nadler also told his interlocutor that the Democrats are going after Trump via the Russia probe, although impeachment might not be the result.
That leaves billionaire Steyer.
“If you look at last night and you look at the popular vote, there was a referendum on the president, and he got crushed,” Steyer told CNN.
That isn’t really true, given that the GOP lost only 23 House seats and gained two in the Senate. Still, Steyer said Democrats must “stand up for the rule of law” to battle Trump, a “lawless” president and a “threat to the American Constitution and the American people.”
Steyer spent $120 million to buy the election, hardly money well spent given the result. Trump lost a third as many seats as President Barack Obama in 2010. Obama lost 63.
Steyer’s push to impeach Trump is nothing new.
He funds a website called “Need To Impeach,” which purports to present the “impeachable offenses” that will bring down The Donald.
Poll: Impeach Trump
Meanwhile, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says, “Democrats have a clear message for party leaders who will take control of the U.S. House of Representatives next year: … Protect their healthcare and impeach President Donald Trump.”
The poll found that 43 percent of Democrats “want impeachment to be a top priority for Congress.” The only thing more important than tilting at that windmill is healthcare, Reuters reported.
Most Americans don’t agree, the poll found, with “just 24 percent of overall respondents listing it among their top three goals for the new Congress.”
The poll, conducted October 30 to November 5, sampled 904 Democrats and 840 Republicans, a sample size that reveals virtually nothing, given that 100 million Americans voted.
Senator Phil Graham, the South Carolina Republican, advised the Democrats thusly: “If they want to impeach President Trump, I’d give them some advice. Been there, done that with Clinton, didn’t work out for us. I would think twice about it. It will blow up in their face.”
As well, after the Democrats won on Tuesday, Pelosi said to knock off the impeachment chatter. “For those who want impeachment, that’s not what our caucus is about,” Pelosi told PBS’ NewsHour. Impeachment would have to be a bipartisan effort with “evidence [that is] so conclusive.”
She said the same thing in April. Her colleague, Maxine Waters, does not agree.
Photo: Clipart.com
