Senate Republicans have decided that their political interests are best served by not conducting a full and fair impeachment trial involving all relevant facts and witness testimony.
As a purely political matter, they may be right: Polls show that Republicans overwhelmingly oppose impeachment and believe Trump when he derides the hearings as a “witch hunt” and a “hoax.” But as President Kennedy famously put it, “sometimes party loyalty asks too much.”
Indeed, GOP senators have greater obligations than loyalty to their party. They have an obligation to the Constitution and to history, to the rule of law and the separation of powers.
Yet, by deliberately conducting a sham trial designed to conceal the truth from the American people while covering-up for Trump, Senate Republicans are shirking these greater obligations and doing themselves and the nation a great disservice.
Specifically and ominously, they are undermining the rule of law and he separation of powers, which are bedrock pillars of our Constitutional order.
Rule of Law. Senate Republicans are undermining the rule of law by ignoring or downplaying Trump’s wrongdoing and refusing to thoroughly examine the factual record to see what laws might have been violated.
And the fact that the House of Representatives did not charge Trump with violating any specific law (though it did charge him with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress) is no excuse for the Senate’s abdication of its Constitutional responsibility to conduct a serious and credible trial.
The House did the best it could in the face of obvious Trump administration stonewalling and obstruction of justice. The Senate, because it is controlled by the president’s own (Republican) party, has far greater political leeway and wherewithal to investigate the administration than does the House.
Trump, after all, is far less likely and able to stonewall GOP senators than he is Democratic congressmen. Yet, the Senate declined to fully exercise its institutional prerogatives during the impeachment trial, and the reasons offered up by Republican senators are weak, feeble, and beside the point.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), for instance, said that because the House proved its case re: the first article of impeachment (abuse of power, by asking Ukraine’s government to “investigate” Joe Biden and Burisma), there is no need for additional witness testimony or evidence—especially since, in Alexander’s mind, Trump’s offense does not warrant his removal from office by the Senate.
But this legalistic excuse for inaction won’t cut it. Impeachment, remember, is a political act. Consequently, there is a lot more to consider than simple guilt or innocence. The Senate has a responsibility to unearth all relevant facts and information, so that the American people can make an informed political decision on election day, Nov. 3, 2020.
This is especially important since the Senate isn’t convicting Trump—in large part, says Alexander, out of respect for the electoral wishes of the citizenry. There is, he notes, a presidential election Nov. 3, 2020, and Trump’s fate should be decided then not now.
Fair enough, but how is the electorate served by short-circuiting the trial and concealing information from the public record that the American people could otherwise review, weigh and consider on election day?
In fact, because the Senate is acquitting Trump, it has an even greater responsibility to ensure that all pertinent evidence and witness testimony are part of the public record.
The Senate, moreover, doesn’t know what it doesn’t know. While the House did not charge Trump with breaking the law per se, it still unearthed a myriad of information that implicates the president with wrongdoing and abusing his authority.
It is entirely possible that a full and complete trial, with firsthand witness testimony, would have unearthed additional information that might have established clearer-cut instances of illegality by the president.
At the very least, if the Senate had taken the time do its due diligence, we would know more than we now do, and voters would have greater situational awareness and understanding when they go to the polls in November.
Separation of Powers. As for the separation of powers, Congress is supposed to be an independent branch of government that serves as a check on the executive branch. Yet, by covering-up for Trump, the Senate has turned itself into a wholly owned subsidiary of Trump, Inc. and yielded its Constitutional authority to the demands of the executive branch.
In short, when it comes to impeachment, there is no separation, as prescribed by the Constitution, between the Senate and the White House. Mitch McConnell, in fact, said publicly before the trial even began that
“Everything I do during this I’m coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this.”
So much for fidelity to the Constitution and its original meaning.
Of course, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board ignores all of this and focuses exclusively on the question of removing Trump from office. They say Alexander’s “vote against witnesses was rooted in Constitutional wisdom” and is his “finest hour” as a public servant.
But while a legitimate case can be made that the Senate should not convict Trump, this does not mean it should abort its search for truth and give up on a full and fair trial. These are two separate and distinct questions, which the Journal deliberately and misleadingly conflates
Thus far from being Alexander’s “finest hour,” his vote against witness testimony was his most disgraceful and shameful act as a senator. And far from being rooted in Constitutional wisdom, this decision instead is an utter abdication of Constitutional duty.
Senate Republicans should hang their heads in shame and be on high alert come election day. The voters may be less forgiving than the GOP’s media apologists at the Wall Street Journal.
Feature photo credit: The Nashville Tennessean via Commercial Appeal.