Rep. Tom Reed Needs A Constitution Refresher: Impeachment IS There

By Karoli Kuns — November 13, 2019

I will be very surprised if any Republican comes out and cheers for impeachment after today. Despite the fact that Ambassador Taylor and Assistant Secretary Kent were forceful, articulate, and clear about what they saw and heard with respect to Donald Trump's extortion scheme, they are going to cling to denial for as long as they possibly can.

Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY) is no exception. He went on Meet the Press Daily to basically complain about the entire process, as if we should always accept the idea of a President extorting a country for the sole purpose of digging dirt about his political opponent.

Because according to Tom Reed, impeachment shouldn't be a tool in the oversight toolbox. Seriously.

"We are making impeachment a political tool in the toolbox that is just tearing this country apart and tearing Washington, D.C. further apart," he complained to Chuck Todd. "We shouldn't be doing that now. and now to have impeachment as another tool in the political toolbox is very dangerous in my opinion."

Hold up there, Skippy. For starters, that's exactly what his party did to Bill Clinton. I'm thinking Clinton should have paid a social price for his sins, but impeachment was way over the top. The framers of the Constituion intended it to be used in instances where the President abuses power, does harm to the American people or national security, violates the oath of office, or commits crimes like extortion and bribery.

But wait, Reed has more excuses. Oversight, he says, is just fine. But impeachment is not oversight and is somehow a violation of the separation of powers. SERIOUSLY dude, read the Constitution. Just do it.

REED: When you're talking about oversight and the roles in oversight, i think sharing that information and complying is something to do. but when you're talking about impeachment, over turning the duly elected decision of the American people. you know, you're going to have that separation of powers that rightfully needs to exist. That's at the heart of our democracy and sustainability of our government is to have that checks and balances and that separation of powers. So, you know, if they were pursuing oversight and not impeachment, that's a different conversation.

An impeachment inquiry is oversight. Plain and simple. It is the Constitutionally mandated DUTY of the House of Representatives to oversee the office of the Executive and to take appropriate action as needed, including impeachment.

Which is sort of what Chuck Todd said back to him:

TODD: I don't understand what the difference is between that argument you're making. I mean, the -- in order to make the decision about impeachment, in order to -- which is essentially a grand jury indictment, you do an investigation to get that. That's what they're doing here. So part of what they're doing is oversight. They haven't voted on impeachment yet.

And you know, if that was the end of the discussion then no problem. But it wasn't. Reed came back again with the bogus assertion that impeachment was overturning the will of the people:

REED: Yeah but, Chuck, but oversight doesn't result in the turning back of the will of the American people from a duly held election. You are then destabilizing the American democracy because now people are going to say what? I voted for my president who was duly elected and the powerful in Washington wants to overturn that election.

Here's the question Chuck Todd should have asked Tom Reed, who is a lawyer and who has certainly studied the United States Constitution: What is the point of having impeachment in the Constitution if it's a destabilizing factor? What is the point of having it at all if it cannot be used?

But no, he glossed right over it and ended the interview.

Impeachment isn't optional for anyone who takes their oath of office seriously. It's a mandate, especially when it's obvious Trump is using the power of his office for his own personal gain and power plays.