A conservative named Daniel McCarthy makes the following arguments against impeachment in today’s NYT:
- The left is too eager to assume the worst about Trump’s motives when other inferences are possible;
- Trump is just fulfilling a campaign promise to behave unconventionally and “drain the swamp;” and
- He has only violated norms, not laws.
My reactions are as follows:
- The only plausible explanation of Trump’s behavior, particularly after hearing yesterday’s testimony, is that he attempted to compel the Ukrainian government to intervene in our election purely for his personal benefit. No other explanation even remotely makes sense.
- What Trump meant by “draining the swamp,” both then and now, was not clear. In any event, complying with campaign promises to take on the establishment is not a legitimate justification for committing high crimes and misdemeanors against the American political system.
- Norms are on a continuum, based on their importance to the integrity of our political system. For example, changing the date on which one customarily gives the State of the Union address would hardly be a high crime and misdemeanor. Directing the Justice Department to bring frivolous criminal charges against political adversaries clearly is. Trying to force foreign countries to assist with a re-election campaign in a manner inconsistent with our declared national interests unquestionably falls on the latter end of the spectrum. In other words, abuses of power may not be technical violations of the law, but they are certainly valid grounds for impeachment.