Republican attorney George Conway has made no secret of his status as one of the most vocal members of the GOP’s “Never Trump” faction despite the fact that he is married to one the president’s closest and most trusted advisors, Kellyanne Conway.
It is not surprising that — as both a legal practitioner and a concerned citizen — Mr. Conway has been paying close attention to the latest phase of the Democrats’ hearings before the House Judiciary Committee as they hear testimony from constitutional scholars regarding the legal basis for the impeachment of President Donald Trump.
When Conway heard the perplexing testimony of the House Republicans’ star witness today, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, he felt compelled to suggest a compromise to help his fellow members of the GOP get over their consternation about Turley’s belief that rather than dismissing all of the charges against Trump as illegitimate, Congress should actually delve deeper into its investigation and call even more fact witnesses to offer their evidence.
Georgia Launches New Policy for Vehicles Used Less Than 25 Miles Per Day
The Horrifying Truth About CBD
Jackie Kennedy Was a Style Icon - but Her Shoes Revealed What We Long Suspected
Conway made his suggestion in a reply to former Hillary Clinton advisor Philippe Reines who had characterized Turley’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee as not exactly what the GOP representatives on the panel were expecting.
In his appearance before the committee, Turley did his best to paint the Democrats’ efforts to impeach Donald Trump as an exercise of partisan anger based on insufficient evidence compared to prior impeachments.
“I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger,” Turley testified. “To impeach a president on such a record would be to expose every future president to the same type of inchoate impeachment.”
Unfortunately, Turley’s argument that the House has not uncovered enough evidence of the president’s wrong-doing to initiate impeachment ignores the fact that at least one reason for his perceived paucity of supporting details is Trump’s own obstruction of the investigation by ordering his executive branch officials to unconstitutionally ignore legally-valid congressional subpoenas and withhold any documentation and records.
George Conway, for his part, offered a tongue-in-cheek compromise that he felt would address Professor Turley’s concerns while still taking the already substantial body of evidence accumulated by the House Intelligence Committee hearings of the past few weeks with the seriousness that it deserves.
In the spirit of compromise, which I think is missing from this age, may I suggest this: Let’s impeach him now but keep investigating, and if we find more evidence, impeach him again. https://t.co/dzAqFjbTgy
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) December 4, 2019
While Conway’s joking compromise would be the fodder for nightmares of perpetual impeachment for Trump’s servile Republican defenders, many Democrats would surely welcome the idea of forcing Donald Trump to endure the type of unending investigations like those to which the GOP subjected Hillary Clinton and of being able to impeach him over and over again.
The rest of us will be happy to see just a single impeachment proceeding — as long as it results in Trump’s removal from office.
Follow Vinnie Longobardo on Twitter.