Jennifer Rubin: McConnell is not going to save the GOP from itself

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:Jennifer 'America is Back' Rubin
@JRubinBlogger
While only a handful of Republican senators attempted to aid and abet the effort to overthrow our democracy (e.g., Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley), all but five would condone Trump’s actions, allowing him to escape accountability for his betrayal of democracy.

Opinion | McConnell is not going to save the GOP from itself
The Senate minority leader has marched his troops right back into the MAGA corner.
washingtonpost.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/27/mcconnell-is-not-going-save-gop-itself/

One might have gotten the impression from the seditious attempt to overthrow the 2020 presidential election results that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was more sane and fearless than his House counterpart, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). Whatever spasm of responsibility compelled McConnell to oppose that effort to subvert democracy has now subsided. He has not the will nor the capacity to prevent the death of the Republican Party.

The Senate on Tuesday voted on a motion by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to declare the impeachment trial unconstitutional on the specious grounds that Donald Trump has left office. (Note that McConnell refused to convene the trial before Jan. 20, thereby abetting his “escape” under Paul’s theory.) Only five Senate Republicans — Mitt Romney (Utah), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Ben Sasse (Neb.), Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) and Susan Collins (Maine) — voted with Democrats to keep the trial on track. Not even Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who announced on Monday he would not run for reelection in 2022, had the spine to support the impeachment trial of an ex-president who incited an insurrection.

As Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the Senate floor, “It makes no sense whatsoever that a president, or any official, could commit a heinous crime against our country and then defeat Congress’ impeachment powers—and avoid a vote on disqualification—by simply resigning or by waiting to commit that offense until their last few weeks in office.”

Brian C. Kalt and Frank Bowman wrote for The Post that the precedent for impeachment after leaving office goes back to the 18th century:

The first impeachment trial under the new Constitution, in 1798, was of an ex-official: Sen. William Blount had conspired to give the British control over then-Spanish Florida and parts of French Louisiana. As soon as the plot was exposed, the House impeached him. The Senate expelled him soon after. At his impeachment trial, Blount’s lawyers argued Blount could not be tried because he was no longer a senator. That argument failed. Blount was ultimately acquitted by a vote of 14-11, but on the basis that senators are not “officers” subject to impeachment in the first place.

An even stronger precedent is the 1876 case of ex-secretary of war William Belknap. After his corrupt scheme to sell a post as Indian agent was revealed to the House, Belknap quickly resigned before he could be impeached. But the House impeached the “late Secretary of War” anyway.

*snip*

[marble falls]

3. Ummmmmm .... pizza.

[lagomorph777]

2. Scary bit: "senators are not "officers" subject to impeachment"

I hope this is not considered "settled law." It wasn't a court decision, but a Senate majority opinion.

A bit more reading seems to indicate that this precedent has, indeed, held up for over two centuries. Senators can be expelled by a 2/3 vote, but it's not considered an "impeachment."

[JT45242]

4. BY that logic they can always come back.... scary thought

One of the real powers of impeachment and conviction is preventing the convicted person form ever holding office again. By this logic, a senator could commit any crime and resign. Then the person could run again with no consequences. That is clearly NOT what the framers intended based on the Federalist papers, debates at the constitutional convention, and English common law.

The whole point was supposed to be that NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.

[lagomorph777]

5. Maybe - but there's that pesky 14th Amendment...

Never been tested in that specific way, as far as I know.

[crickets]

6. K&R for visibility.