Thread by @RadioFreeTom

So, here's my thought on impeachment, and it might not be what you'd think I'd say. I talked about it here with @MeghnaWBUR and I'll amplify a little. /1
wbur.org/onpoint/2019/0…

First, I think the Russians will see impeachment as a hoot. Their mission was to use Trump to paralyze our system, and it worked, and impeachment will deepen the chaos and paralysis, and it will only turn out one way. So, it's win-win for Moscow. /2

That's not a reason not to do it; just saying that striking back at Moscow isn't a reason *to* do it, either. They'll enjoy the show, make hay while it lasts, and laugh. Because they know the GOP, as a national security party, has completely collapsed and is no threat to them. /3

But there's an argument, internal to us, that Trump should be impeached as a lesson in civics, as a reminder that trashing the rule of law and discarding your oath is not cost-free. That's a political question. Until now, I've said it's probably a bad idea for the Dems. /4

But political expediency is a bad idea too. At some point, *not* impeaching means that nothing matters in our constitutional life, and that nothing ever *will* matter. Impeachment, if it follows a careful rollout and debate, can negate that legacy. /5

And maybe, years from now, what we need is an asterisk in the history books that says: "There was a penalty for violating the oath of office, and engaging in these high crimes. And President Trump survived due only to the corruption of a single party." /6

That's a political question for Congress. But the bottom line for me now is: in foreign policy, no matter what happens - impeachment, 2020 defeat, or 2020 election, it's a win for the Russians. /7

As a domestic, constitutional matter, I think at some point this has turned into a dare from the White House, an assertion of complete immunity for anything this president ever wants to do. That's a bad precedent and Congress may now have no other way to avoid it. /8x