Watch for frequent updates!

Yale 62


Why Rush to Judgment?

By Stephen D. Susman

That’s the question I would put to the leadership of the House conducting the Impeachment Inquiry. Since not a single Republican in the House or Senate has to date supported the indictment of President Trump, no one can doubt that the trial in the Senate will end with his acquittal of any and all charges.

The trial in the Senate will be controlled by Trump supporters: which witnesses to call, how long the trial will last, what evidence to subpoena or consider, all will be orchestrated by the Republicans to allow Trump to control the news cycle and provide him with Twitter material. At the end, an acquittal will propel him to re-election.

So why not keep the investigation going in the House, even though Trump has refused to co-operate. New witnesses (e.g., Giuliani and anyone else party to the recently discovered cell phone calls) can be subpoenaed. Maybe something can be turned up which will change Republican minds. At the very least, there will be more and more instances of obstruction. Every trial lawyer wants to be before a friendly judge/jury and that’s why Trump wants his lawyers to get this case to the Senate asap.

Is there enough evidence to impeach? For sure. Is there enough to get a conviction? No way. The best way to protect the integrity of the next election is to adopt a course of conduct most likely to result in Trump losing. One that results in an acquittal is not helpful.

11 comments to Why Rush to Judgment?

  • Norm Jackson

    Well said, Sanguine!

  • Hank Truslow

    What “course of conduct” would you suggest? Why not try bipartisanship sprinkled with some civility??? or is it too late??

  • Jim Kelly

    Steve Susman’s assessment has a lot of merit. Giving the issue to the Senate before the New Year as a means of simplifying the political lives of the Democrats during an election year could turn out to do anything but that. The timing of the trial phase is totally in the majority party hands in the Senate and will be used to maximum effect. Better for the House to keep control throughout 2020, albeit in a more drawn out manner. It is certain there is a lot of material to investigate in the Mueller proceedings.

  • The course of conduct is to keep the investigation on-going in the House. Tell the President we’re sorry we rushed: you want more time, we’ll give it to you. You can have several months to put on witnesses. File emergency contempt orders with the courts and ask them to expedite. We should not assume this will end badly in the courts or that they can’t act quickly.

  • Ken Merkey

    I am not sure this is an appropriate forum for this discussion and I generally avoid publicizing my thoughts but I have had enough of this charade.

    With Biden’s and crooked Hillary’s transgressions going unpunished, the lunacy of the left decides to take on Trump on the skimpiest of evidence. Even Judge Judy knows that hearsay evidence is not permitted in any court in the land. Having sex in the Oval office with an intern far exceeds the criminality of any of Trump’s actions. Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, and Ohr can violate FISA regulations and they get a whitewash from the IG.

    Pelosi said that she was going to drain the swamp; she only made it smellier.

    I do not buy into any of Steyer’s platform except for term limits. Maybe the time has come to clean house.

    Deplorable, and proud of it.

    • John Stewart

      Hi Ken,
      Thanks so much for writing. I’m delighted that you visit Yale62 and I appreciate the passion of your convictions. The large tent of our web page represents a variety of views from our classmates, and I hope in remembering our common Yale bond we can come together in “the neutral zone” to stay in touch and correspond with those with whom we might not fully agree.

    • Alberto. Mestre

      I fully agree with your comments and I am very pleased with them.The Democratic Party is now a Socialist Party, with people who dream of a failed Socialist paradise and ever larger governments, and with absolutely no respectable leadership and only dreams of impeaching Trump from day one of his Presidency., which they never thought he could win becasue of their enormous arrogance and disregard for us, “ deplorables “

  • william weber

    Regardless of all the chatter about impeachment Trump, is going to win by a landslide unless he screws up horribly or some knight in shining armor comes forward, which is highly unlikely. I know many people who are True Believers of the man and that is all there is to it. So sit back and endure the next 5 years!

  • steve howard

    Sorry to see so many of my classmates unwilling or unable to see what a true horror Trump is …

  • II agree with Steve & Jim Kelly,
    The House moved relatively quickly because Trump’s corruption has to brought to the country’s attention and Trump and his government blocked all reasonable and legal efforts to obtain the direct evidence of his misdeeds. By holding off sending the articles more evidence will come out (maybe even exculpatory). The Supreme Court might also rule by the summer which could allow more direct evidence. After the Merrick Garland fiasco that the republicans pulled off, they have no right to complain, even if Pelosi waits to until after November 2020.

  • Chip Neville

    Steve Sussman has got it right. Wait, even until after November of 2020 if necessary. The Democratic Party needs to save itself. And we, The People of the United States of America, need to remove Trump from office, whether by election or impeachment.