With Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) facing a censure vote in the House yesterday, June 14, and Homeland Security chief Alejandro Mayorkas about to undergo an investigation and possible impeachment beginning today, it seems the American public is enraptured with political scandal. More entertaining than a TV soap opera, and with all the prizes and punishments that put reality TV to shame, the plots and schemes of government provide a heady environment for drama.
In the early 17th century, Charles Drelincourt wrote of “un Advocat qui s’embarasse dans les intrigues du Palais” or “an advocate embarrassed* in the intrigues of the palace.” And thus spawned a long legacy of describing the machinations of those in power. The American fascination with “go big or go home” is in no way precluded from the arena of palace intrigue, and Congress is certainly no exception. With a proposed mass of expulsions and impeachments, it seems that the DC denizens are determined to make their mark by any means available.
Adam Schiff (Photo by Jerod Harris/Getty Images for Demand Justice)
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) introduced measures to both censure and fine Schiff for “lies, misrepresentations and abuses of sensitive information” during the FBI probe of Russian collusion during the 2016 election.
As the top Democrat on the House Intel Committee during Donald Trump’s administration, Schiff was privy to information withheld from the public and other lawmakers. He used this position to condemn Trump publicly and in the nation’s press, on numerous occasions saying that he had seen “evidence” of collusion. He told NBC’s Chuck Todd there was “circumstantial evidence of collusion” as well as “direct evidence … of deception.” Both the Mueller and Durham probes found no such evidence.
Luna’s resolution sought to see Schiff expelled from the House and fined a hefty sum. She called the $16 million penalty a refund for the “American taxpayers [who] were forced to pay for the Russia hoax investigation.” The man in question, naturally, sees things very differently.
Late Wednesday, the House voted 225-196 against the censure, with 20 Republicans joining almost all Democrats – five GOP members and two Dems simply voted present. But perhaps the intention was rather to relitigate Schiff’s statements in the public square than to follow through with the expulsion and fine. With Schiff now running for Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s California seat, any bad publicity for the Senate hopeful is good news for the GOP.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), on May 18, introduced articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden. In a written statement, she declared:
“Joe Biden has deliberately compromised our national security by refusing to enforce immigration laws and secure our border, allowed approximately 6 million illegals from over 160 countries to invade our country, deprived border patrol of the necessary resources and policies sufficient to protect our country, and his administration has willfully refused to maintain operational control as required by law.”
The three articles submitted run the gamut of Biden’s border policies. First up is the claim that his policies have led to an increase in “illegal aliens and illegal narcotics, including deadly fentanyl, entering the United States” and that “by releasing illegal aliens into the interior of the United States” he has violated the law.
The second charge is that the current administration allowed “illegal aliens who had tested positive for COVID-19 to enter the country and infect American citizens.” Finally, Greene charged that Biden has “created a national security crisis and is endangering the lives of everyday Americans with his open border policies.”
This is not the first time Greene has attempted to oust Biden, but it is the first since the GOP took back control of the House. While much of the legacy media delights in calling out the Georgia lawmaker as an unhinged radical, her timing betrays a bright spark of political surety.
Her earlier efforts to impeach the president were marred by two significant challenges: her party’s minority status in the House and the lack of a Biden track record. Both of these barriers are now moot.
Alejandro Mayorkas (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
It is not only elected lawmakers who are facing the “fire and fury” of a newly emboldened House majority. A groundswell for impeaching appointed officials is also coming to a boil. The most notable recipient being Mayorkas for his mishandling of the border, and “going out of his way to allow this invasion on our southern border,” as California Rep. Mike Garcia (R) puts it. “When the Joker is acting like the Joker, it’s one thing,” he said. “But when Batman — who’s supposed to be protecting you — starts acting like the Joker, you’ve got to do something about it.”
And then there is Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who is under fire after it was revealed that he was involved in organizing the letter from 51 national security experts to debunk the Hunter Biden laptop story. According to a Rasmussen Reports survey, 60% of Americans think he should be impeached for his role in what many see as a cover-up. He is also facing contempt of Congress charges for his unwillingness to assist House Republicans in investigating the botched Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021.
It would be tempting to think of the new GOP House majority as politically litigious opportunists, but that stance is far from fair or accurate. Impeachment and contempt charges were positively rife during the Trump era, and many individuals have still yet to recover their careers and standing after being targeted by the Democrat-led lower chamber. Trump notably faced two impeachment trials, but chatter and efforts to “hold him to account” were well underway before he even took office.
It seems that impeachments and threats of such are tools in a wide-ranging kit from which lawmakers can choose. But like any tool, it often has more than one purpose. Remember, impeaching is hard work and risky, but getting the Fourth Estate talking about it can sometimes do just as much damage.
*”embarrassed” here could also be translated as “entangled” or “embroiled” in this quote.