,
4 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
To argue—like Speaker Pelosi—that one first needs to assemble all possible facts before proceeding, is to profoundly misunderstand the nature of impeachment. An impeachment inquiry is the constitutional mechanism for doing this work, not its outcome: theatlantic.com/magazine/archi…
2. Congress heard testimony today from Robert Mueller, confirming his report, that the president acted on multiple occasions to obstruct justice—although Mueller carefully did not state that as his conclusion. That’s supposed to be Congress’s role, not his theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
3. The House leadership is not disputing Mueller’s facts. It is not disputing the conclusion that here—and elsewhere—the president committed apparent crimes. But it refuses to launch the inquiry necessary to assemble the evidence, framing impeachment as an outcome, not a process.
4. Impeachment is the process of investigation and adjudication, designed by the Framers to resolve serious allegations of presidential misconduct. That’s precisely the situation we now face. If these facts do not justify an inquiry, what would? theatlantic.com/magazine/archi…
