It is a given that the House of Representatives could impeach President Trump and another given the Republican Senate would never convict him, but it is equally likely the matter would never even be taken up by the Senate.
Everyday jabbering heads on MSNBC breathlessly declare the new count of House Democrats announcing support to impeach President Trump.
Who would that be good for? For the TV folks because House Judiciary Committee Impeachment Hearings, an impeachment vote and the trial of an impeachment bill would be what? It would be a ratings buster and give MSNBC and CNN a fall series and higher ad rates. Fox too of course, but from an opposite take. That’s the cable news stake in this.
Our stake, your’s, mine and the nation’s is that impeachment would give Trump exactly what he wants, the supreme cause to rally his mobs and attack and attack and attack during his reelection year campaign.
Why has he spent the past month on a racist rampage? Because, shrewdly, he is driving more and more House Democrats to call for his impeachment apparently believing that would clinch his reelection.
So what are the prospects even though by now at last count 112 House Democrats have taken the bait? The answer, slim to none.
If 112 House Democrats don’t understand how toxic impeachment would be for them, one Democrat knows that to impeach Trump is to put regaining the White House at risk, surrender any remote chance of retaking the Senate and jeopardize what she spent the past eight years regaining — the Democratic House majority.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has had one consistent objective this year – to fend off the political suicide of impeachment. She knew if she could get the House to its August recess she would have that under control. She’s accomplished it.
Even accelerated, which would mean no delays for inevitable court challenges by Trump and House Republicans concerning subpoenas, rules, and process, the appointment of impeachment counsel and the like, such proceedings would be a two-to-six months adventure extending into the second quarter of 2020.
As we all know, the House accuses, the Senate tries and decides. A bill of impeachment effectively is a congressional grand jury indictment.
The trial would be conducted by the Senate with Chief Justice John Roberts presiding. The Republican majority would appoint senators to defend him. Presumably, the Senate Democrats would be expected to appoint the prosecutors because no Republican would agree or dare to do so.
We know it would take two-thirds of the Senate to convict on impeachment. That’s 67 senators in a chamber Republicans control 54-46. That’s not going to happen because there are not and never will be 67 votes in this Senate for impeachment.
There is another reason it won’t happen, which is that nothing says an impeachment trial has to take place.
It’s this: Who says the Senate must or would try an impeachment of Trump if one is sent by the House?
Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states:
“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside. And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.”
And that is all the Constitution says about the Senate’s role in an impeachment trial.
What it does not say is must. It does not say the Senate must try a bill of impeachment sent by the House. It says nothing at all as to that.
Then, who would decide whether to convene the Senate for an impeachment trial? The man who controls the calendar and the agenda of the United States Senate.
That man is Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Why would he allow an impeachment trial, especially in an election year, that would focus the nation’s attention on the alleged misdeeds of President Trump, effectively spreading scandalous negative charges and proofs against Trump across the public record?
Trump might want McConnell to, knowing he could continue to gin his base with such a trial, while ceratin there would never be 21 Republican Senate votes, if any at all, to add to the 46 Democratic votes in the Senate to convict him even if all Democrats were on board (and at least one, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia might not be).
Could/would Democrats likely sue to get a court to order McConnell to move forward with a trial? Yes, they probably would. Would the suit succeed? Pretty likely not just on the merits, never mind the partisan divide on the court. Such a decision could well be judicial interference with the separation of powers and intrusion into the Article I power of the Senate to be the sole judge of impeachment.
In sum, impeachment by the House is not only politically self-defeating, but the chance that it would never actually be taken up and tried in this Senate is almost as certain as the outcome of a trial.
McConnell, after all, as Judge Merrick Garland can attest, is a man who ruthlessly will sacrifice the Constitution and even the Senate’s rules and its very history to accomplish a political goal
Peeling the Onion 
I am torn on this issue…I have long thought as you do that impeachment is politically unwise and would play right into Trump’s hands. Recently, I have been almost persuaded that the President’s behavior is so egregious that it is important to challenge him in a formal process just to get the charges on the official record.
Your point about McConnell’s likely inaction on a bill of impeachment is well taken but that might be the best outcome for the Democrats…..getting the indictment and supporting evidence on the record but not having a trial to give the President the chance to declare his innocence.
Hope you are well….
LikeLike
Hi and thanks for taking a look. Did you see my recent, admittedly way long piece about the presidential contest, Part VIIi? It describes the rules for delegate selection and makes a case, reinforced by the debates I think, that this could well be headed for a second and likely third ballot at the convention. As to impeachment, well — reinforced by the circular firing squad drill the debates have become — I do think strongly that it would be an incredible political miscalculation and tie the Democratic Party in knots for the better part of the year — an election year. History will judge him, much more swiftly perhaps then it usually does and at least two U.S. Attorney offices will have to decide what to do when he is a private citizen again. But for now, I think the best judgment is at the ballot bot both for practical reasons and because voting Trump out of office is a much stronger statement than impeachment.
Otherwise, I am well and enjoying life again. Trust you are both well and as always sending best best wishes to you both with a Hi to Diana
LikeLike
Has McConnell indicated his position on bringing the issue to the senate?
LikeLike
No, but it is not hard to imagine what it would be. Nor would or will he have to signal that unless and until there is impeachment. He can just let Democrats hang themselves out to dry.
LikeLike