Talk of impeaching President Trump is everywhere. But Democrats have been pining for Trump's impeachment since before he even set foot in the White House. Michael Cohen's guilty plea is just the latest excuse to bring it up.
A Politico headline that ran soon after the Cohen plea went public read: "Legal blows fuel impeachment fears." A more accurate headline would have been: "Legal blows fuel impeachment hopes."
For Trump haters, it's always been about impeachment. The only challenge has been to find something to impeach Trump with.
Even before Trump secured the Republican Party nomination, some Democrats were talking about impeaching him. And throughout his presidency, every twist and turn of various investigations and every breathless — and often faulty — "bombshell" news story, every alleged foreign policy misstep, has sparked a new round of impeachment talk.
More than a year ago, for example, the New York Times ran a lengthy story explaining how the impeachment process worked. That was back when the press was sure that Trump obstructed justice by supposedly urging former FBI Director James Comey to drop his investigation into Michael Flynn.
In November, Democrats introduced five articles of impeachment against Trump. Rep. Al Green's impeachment resolution charged Trump with tarnishing "the majesty and dignity of the presidency with causes rooted in white supremacy, bigotry, racism, anti-Semitism, white nationalism, or neo-Nazism." Nearly a third of House Democrats voted to force a vote on that resolution.
Polls find that three-quarters of Democrats support impeaching Trump, and oddsmakers have been betting on Trump's impeachment almost from Day One.
The Russia probe, too, hasn't been about finding lawbreakers so much as setting Trump up for impeachment, as National Review's Andrew McCarthy has repeatedly pointed out. "The real word lurking behind 'collusion' is not 'conspiracy.' It is 'impeachment,' " he wrote back in November.
So, don't be fooled by any Democrat who says the party won't make impeachment the first order of business should they recapture the House. Or that Cohen's plea suddenly makes impeachment plausible.
In addition to pleading guilty to tax fraud and making false statements, Cohen pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws when he paid porn star Stormy Daniels to keep her from talking about an alleged affair between her and Trump. Cohen said he did this "for the principal purpose of influencing the election" and at the direction of Trump.
Why Did Cohen Cop That Plea?
There are a few oddities about the campaign finance plea. Why would Cohen plead guilty to a charge that would have been hard to prove in court, given the complexity of campaign finance law, and that carried little chance of anything other than a fine? It's far from clear that the payment to Daniels constitutes an illegal campaign contribution, at least according to some campaign finance experts.
It's likely, then, that the only reason Cohen pleaded guilty to the campaign finance charges was to put Trump in an impeachment box. Since there won't be a trial, there's no chance those charges get dropped, and everyone can now say that Trump was "implicated in a criminal conspiracy."
As the New York Sun aptly put it in an editorial, by doing so Cohen denied "his ex-client the chance to contest his allegations in an adversarial proceeding."
So, score one for Cohen's attorney, former Clinton fixer Lanny Davis, who had to know this would give Democrats additional impeachment fodder should they take control of the House after the midterm elections.
Impeachment Is Futile
But even if Cohen did break campaign finance laws, it's still Cohen's word against Trump's about whether then-candidate Trump directed him to do so. Is that enough to remove a sitting president?
In any case, let's assume that Democrats do take the House in the November midterm elections and do impeach Trump. Unless Democrats also take control of the Senate in the midterms — which is highly unlikely — what are the chances that a Republican-controlled Senate would find Trump guilty and remove him from office? (Of course, you never know what spineless Republicans will do.)
Most likely, all an impeachment proceeding would do is tie up the administration for the next two years and, Democrats hope, improve their chances in 2020.
It all reminds us of something "Alice in Wonderland's" Queen of Hearts said: "sentence first — verdict afterwards." Except Democrats don't even want to bother with the verdict.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/michael-cohen-guilty-plea-trump-impeachment/
A Politico headline that ran soon after the Cohen plea went public read: "Legal blows fuel impeachment fears." A more accurate headline would have been: "Legal blows fuel impeachment hopes."
For Trump haters, it's always been about impeachment. The only challenge has been to find something to impeach Trump with.
Even before Trump secured the Republican Party nomination, some Democrats were talking about impeaching him. And throughout his presidency, every twist and turn of various investigations and every breathless — and often faulty — "bombshell" news story, every alleged foreign policy misstep, has sparked a new round of impeachment talk.
More than a year ago, for example, the New York Times ran a lengthy story explaining how the impeachment process worked. That was back when the press was sure that Trump obstructed justice by supposedly urging former FBI Director James Comey to drop his investigation into Michael Flynn.
In November, Democrats introduced five articles of impeachment against Trump. Rep. Al Green's impeachment resolution charged Trump with tarnishing "the majesty and dignity of the presidency with causes rooted in white supremacy, bigotry, racism, anti-Semitism, white nationalism, or neo-Nazism." Nearly a third of House Democrats voted to force a vote on that resolution.
Polls find that three-quarters of Democrats support impeaching Trump, and oddsmakers have been betting on Trump's impeachment almost from Day One.
The Russia probe, too, hasn't been about finding lawbreakers so much as setting Trump up for impeachment, as National Review's Andrew McCarthy has repeatedly pointed out. "The real word lurking behind 'collusion' is not 'conspiracy.' It is 'impeachment,' " he wrote back in November.
So, don't be fooled by any Democrat who says the party won't make impeachment the first order of business should they recapture the House. Or that Cohen's plea suddenly makes impeachment plausible.
In addition to pleading guilty to tax fraud and making false statements, Cohen pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws when he paid porn star Stormy Daniels to keep her from talking about an alleged affair between her and Trump. Cohen said he did this "for the principal purpose of influencing the election" and at the direction of Trump.
Why Did Cohen Cop That Plea?
There are a few oddities about the campaign finance plea. Why would Cohen plead guilty to a charge that would have been hard to prove in court, given the complexity of campaign finance law, and that carried little chance of anything other than a fine? It's far from clear that the payment to Daniels constitutes an illegal campaign contribution, at least according to some campaign finance experts.
It's likely, then, that the only reason Cohen pleaded guilty to the campaign finance charges was to put Trump in an impeachment box. Since there won't be a trial, there's no chance those charges get dropped, and everyone can now say that Trump was "implicated in a criminal conspiracy."
As the New York Sun aptly put it in an editorial, by doing so Cohen denied "his ex-client the chance to contest his allegations in an adversarial proceeding."
So, score one for Cohen's attorney, former Clinton fixer Lanny Davis, who had to know this would give Democrats additional impeachment fodder should they take control of the House after the midterm elections.
Impeachment Is Futile
But even if Cohen did break campaign finance laws, it's still Cohen's word against Trump's about whether then-candidate Trump directed him to do so. Is that enough to remove a sitting president?
In any case, let's assume that Democrats do take the House in the November midterm elections and do impeach Trump. Unless Democrats also take control of the Senate in the midterms — which is highly unlikely — what are the chances that a Republican-controlled Senate would find Trump guilty and remove him from office? (Of course, you never know what spineless Republicans will do.)
Most likely, all an impeachment proceeding would do is tie up the administration for the next two years and, Democrats hope, improve their chances in 2020.
It all reminds us of something "Alice in Wonderland's" Queen of Hearts said: "sentence first — verdict afterwards." Except Democrats don't even want to bother with the verdict.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/michael-cohen-guilty-plea-trump-impeachment/
What a baby.