Can the Refusal by Don McGahn Save the Presidency from Impeachment?
The question of whether the refusal of top White House counsel Don McGahn to fire Robert Mueller as per President Trump's request saved the presidency resonates deeply in the current political climate. As the nation grapples with the uncertainties of the presidency and the delicate balance of power, it's crucial to understand the implications of such actions and the constitutional mechanisms in place.
The Impeachment Process and its Limitations
Many believe that the Republican Congress will not impeach or convict President Trump. One of the primary reasons revolved around the belief that the president remains useful to the Republican party. In a recent editorial, it was noted that if the Republicans were to impeach and remove Trump from office, they would lose a significant asset. This utility, coupled with the practicalities of the impeachment process, makes it unlikely the Senate would vote to convict.
Impeachment, in itself, is akin to a grand jury returning an indictment. It initiates a formal investigation into the president's actions but does not inherently remove him from office. For removal, the Senate must hold a trial and vote to convict. The bar for conviction in the Senate is considerably high, requiring a two-thirds majority, which is challenging given the Republican control of the Senate.
The FBI and Potential Prosecution
Another layer of complexity lies in the potential for the FBI to prosecute Trump. Many suggest that the FBI will likely wait until Trump leaves office to press charges. This timing strategy could be informed by the political realities and the current configuration of the government, where the DOJ (Department of Justice) is largely beholden to the current administration.
However, it's important to note that the DOJ has a statutory obligation to follow the law. The FBI, as an independent body, would face considerable political pressure if it were to begin prosecuting Trump while he is still in office. The political currents suggest that such an action would be used as a political weapon rather than a legal one, leading the FBI to tread cautiously.
Checks and Balances and the Republican Dominance
The broader implication of these political realities is the erosion of the checks and balances within the government. The removal of these mechanisms has led to a democratic deficit, where the will of the majority is increasingly ignored in favor of partisan agendas. There is a prevailing sense that the most populous states and regions are not driving the legislative and executive agendas.
The term 'useful idiot' aptly describes this scenario, where Trump is seen as a puppet for the Republican party. He has the ability to rubber-stamp legislation and policies that Congress sends his way, regardless of the public interest or constitutional norms.
The separation of powers, a cornerstone of the American government, has been under threat. The House, controlled by the Democratic party, has shown resistance against Trump's policies and has initiated impeachment proceedings. However, the Senate, controlled by Republicans, provides a significant hurdle to the conviction process. The intrusion of partisan politics has made it impossible to effectively remove the president from office, even if substantial evidence exists against him.
The reality is that our government is increasingly being driven by narrow interests and political calculations rather than the principles and ideals of the Constitution. The least-populous states wielding disproportionate power in the Senate through gerrymandering and local politics has further skewed the legislative process, ensuring that the voices of the majority remain suppressed.
Conclusion: The Future of the Republic
The refusal of Don McGahn to fire Robert Mueller adds a critical dimension to the debate. It highlights the complex interplay between legal mandates, political pressures, and the broader implications for the American political system. As we move forward, the balance of power will continue to shape the trajectory of the presidency and the future of the Republic.
The question of whether this refusal saved the presidency remains open. However, it undoubtedly raises important questions about the resilience of democratic institutions in the face of political pressures and the need for robust checks and balances to protect the Republic from the whims of individuals and transient political whims.