IMPEACHENT PROS AND CONS

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Why would I feel compelled to write about impeachment from my post out West far from the action?

Well, I am a bit of a political junkie, so the subject interests me.  Plus, a lot is at stake for Americans and our system of government as we watch impeachment processes play out in Washington, D.C.

And, as with many political issues these days, I can understand both sides – those in favor of holding former president Donald Trump to account for provoking insurrection, and those not in favor of doing so because, after all, he is no longer in office as president and it’s time to focus on the new president’s priorities, the leading one of which is to control the virus.

It appears that there are not votes in the Senate to convict Trump, so it strikes me that there could be a compromise:  Censure him for his reprehensible conduct so as not to allow such conduct to escape punishment.

Meanwhile, House Democrats are moving ahead with plans to argue impeachment before the Senate.

They have sought out new cellphone footage of the January 6 Capitol insurrection, as well as updated details about injured police officers.

They want to present the Senate with fresh evidence that reveals what Trump knew in advance of the rampage at the Capitol, as well as how his words and actions influenced those who participated to lay siege to the Capitol.  

Overall, the rioting left five dead, including a Capital police officer.   In addition, two officers, one with the D.C. Police Department, died by suicide.

As reported by the Washington Post, the effort to present new video evidence and witness testimony appears designed to make Republican senators as uncomfortable as possible as they prepare to vote to acquit Trump, as most have indicated they will do.

The prospect of injured police officers describing the brutality of pro-Trump rioters to Republicans who regularly present themselves as advocates of law enforcement could make for an extraordinary, nationally televised scene.

Republican votes to acquit appear to be based on the contention that it is unconstitutional to try a former president on impeachment charges.  That spares them from having to evaluate Trump’s conduct.  

The “he’s out of office” theory is contested by many constitutional scholars, but has gained a foothold in the GOP ranks.

But, as I wrote earlier, if there are no consequences for subversion and insurrection, it may encourage future presidents to do the same thing.

One person who wrote a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal put it this way:

“If there are no consequences for subversion and insurrection, it may encourage future presidents to do the same thing.  Nothing is more important in a democracy than the peaceful transfer of power.”

So, when all is said and done, it appears the most extreme punishment for Trump – conviction after impeachment – won’t occur.  I say head for censure instead and, then, get about important business in this country sans Trump.

Leave a comment