Thread by @McAdooGordon

So if the Congress is really going to impeach DJT again, here’s the thing on an “incitement” charge. As I’ve been saying, there is no basis for “incitement” as a matter of criminal law, based on his speech or his conduct overall. It’s not a legitimately indictable case. /1

Like many,(& probably most actually), lawyers, I do not believe impeachment requires that the conduct satisfy the criminal law to be impeachable. That is, just because it’s not a crime doesn’t mean it’s not impeachable. The criminal law is certainly a guide to use, however. /2

So for an impeachment on “incitement,” I suppose you look at the situation a bit more broadly than the criminal law does & say DJT created the environment that led to the storming. I personally think there are too many contributing factors to hold him responsible that way. /3

I think the criminal law incitement analysis already cuts the right balance of free speech, personal responsibility, foreseeability, imminence, etc. Unlike some other impeachment grounds, I’d come out the same way as the criminal law does on incitement; these facts aren’t it./4

So if I were in Congress I wouldn’t support an impeachment on “incitement” because I don’t see any incitement. But impeachment is a quasi-legal, quasi-political decision, so some members of Congress may go that way. /5