‘Weak’: Former White House counsel breaks down why McConnell’s arguments on impeachment ‘precedent’ are deeply flawed

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made it abundantly clear that he doesn’t consider himself an “impartial juror” in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial and that he will be coordinating with Trump in the weeks ahead. One of the Kentucky Republican’s arguments is that Trump’s impeachment, unlike the impeachment of Present Bill Clinton in the late 1990s, has not been handled in a fair way. But former White House Counsel Bob Bauer, in a January 16 article for Benjamin Wittes’ Lawfare website, lays out some of reasons why McConnell’s arguments on impeachment “precedent” are misleading.

McConnell has argued that Trump’s impeachment in the U.S. House of Representatives was handled in an overtly “partisan” manner by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and other Democrats — while Clinton’s impeachment in the late 1990s was not. Bauer totally disagrees.

“McConnell’s history is weak,” Bauer asserts. “More than 90% of the House Republicans voted for Clinton’s impeachment; more than 90% of Republican senators voted for convicting him. By any measure, among lawmakers, there was overwhelming Republican Party support for ousting a Democratic president from office. McConnell’s professed claims of historically unprecedented partisanship is founded on the pointless distinction between fully party-line and just-over-90% party-line support.” Continue reading.