Democrats wanted impeachment in the worst way possible. It turned out that was just what they got. They announced that they planned to impeach President Trump before he had even taken office. That breaks the unofficial first rule of impeachment — always act as if it were a painful necessity, not something you are doing for fun or out of spite.
When President Richard Nixon faced impeachment in 1974, everyone understood that it was a necessity. It was only the second impeachment in history, and it was being done more than a century after the first; when President Bill Clinton was impeached in 1999, it was rather more frivolous and a great deal more partisan. When Trump was impeached, it was entirely partisan, and it had been planned before the events that supposedly required it had even taken place.
In prior impeachments, there had been a real smoking gun. Clinton had lied under oath. Nixon had approved the Watergate break-in. Here, there was a gun on the table that seemed at one time had been pointed at someone but seemed to have never gone off. Nixon and Clinton were impeached for something they did; Trump was impeached for something he thought about doing, threatened to do, or even did for a moment before being talked out of it and letting go.
Then, impeachment slammed into the Iowa caucuses, the first huge event of the primary season. It wiped the contest off the TV screens and front pages for weeks altogether, leaving all of the candidates to stew in frustration. The four who are senators — Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Michael Bennet of Colorado (technically, he is still running, believe it or not) — were forced to stew in even greater frustration as they longed to get back on the trail.
Not only did Democrats’ poll ratings drop in the course of the hearings, but Trump’s approval ratings ticked up a little bit; it’s as if the unrestrained attacks on him have only served as a character reference. Democrats would have been better off had they issued a censure concerning the Ukraine interference. That might have drawn some bipartisan backing and perhaps even served as the prelude to a future impeachment that people would actually view as legitimate. After all, given Trump’s penchant for precedent-breaking, such a thing could occur at any time.
One oddity was that Trump was really impeached more for who and what he is as a person rather than for any particular foible, stumble, misjudgment, or fault. He is rash and erratic, vindictive and petty, and wholly narcissistic — just what you’d expect of a TV star and mogul. He has a freewheeling, unfettered style of business. When he wandered into the more restrictive arena of politics, with all of its checks and balances, you had to expect trouble.
Normally, a candidate such as Trump would have been winnowed out by the process. But his opposition in the Republican primaries was uniquely divided, and his opposition in the general election was as corrupt and self-seeking as he is.
On the matter of witnesses in the impeachment trial, the Democrats also were routed, though perhaps not for the reason you would think. It is, at heart, not a question of Republican lawmakers’ loyalty to Trump, but of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s loyalty to his remaining Republican senators in hard-to-win states.
In 2018, and even to some extent in 2016, Democrats enjoyed great success in capturing swing states and swing districts. Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire lost by a hair in 2016. Possible Ayottes in 2020 are Sens. Susan Collins in Maine, Cory Gardner in Colorado, and perhaps two or three others.
A vote to call witnesses would have meant more questions and more votes — more divisive and tough votes for these very vulnerable Republicans. And McConnell’s devotion to Trump is as naught next to his concern for his own troops. That is the real reason he shut this down as quickly as possible. And in doing so, he made losers of the Democrats once again.
