Should Trump Be Impeached Again for the Pay-for-Pardon Scheme?
The question of whether former President Donald Trump should be impeached again for his role in the pay-for-pardon scheme is a complex one. On one hand, it is clear that there have been serious violations of the law. On the other hand, the practical implications of another impeachment and trial must also be considered.
Impeachment for Threats and Impropriety
It is argued that Trump should be impeached not because of the pay-for-pardon scheme, but due to his attempt to overturn the election through threats and improper actions. The facts in the latter are much clearer and more compelling when it comes to justifying another impeachment. His refusal to accept the election results and his improper demands to reverse the outcome through legal and illegal means is a serious breach of his duties as a public official.
Why Impeachment Now?
Pointless Impeachment: Impeaching Trump at this stage would be largely pointless. He will step down from office in just 21 days, and even a successful trial would likely take at least a week or two. This means that the process would not effectively remove him from office soon enough to prevent immediate chaos.
Ineffective Senate: Given that the GOP still controls the Senate, there is no real chance of actually achieving removal. Impeaching Trump once more would simply be an exercise in confirmatory action without real legislative constraint.
Indictment and State Crimes: As a private citizen, Trump could still face indictment for numerous additional state-level crimes, many of which might not even be eligible for a pardon. This broadens the potential legal actions beyond the presidential sphere.
The Context of Pardons
The article from CNN presents historical context by noting that various U.S. presidents have pardoned a wide range of individuals for various reasons. Examples mentioned include:
Jimmy Carter pardoning numerous individuals, including Oscar Collazo (attempted assassination of Presidents Truman) and Lolita Lebron (gun attack on U.S. House of Representatives).
Ronald Reagan pardoning numerous individuals, including George Steinbrenner.
Barack Obama pardoning 1,927 individuals, including Chelsea Manning (whistleblower) and numerous others.
These examples suggest that the power to pardon is not unprecedented, but also raises questions about limiting this power to prevent abuses in the future.
Conclusion
While there is a strong argument for invoking impeachment due to the serious risks posed by Trump's actions to overturn the election, the practical realities of current politics and the impending end of his term complicate this course of action. Instead, focusing on constraining his future activities and allowing state-level investigations into potential abuses might be more effective. This more targeted approach could help ensure that future attempts to manipulate the pardon process are dealt with more appropriately.