Listen 8 min
Share
Comment on this story Comment
For the third time in four years, the House has moved forward with impeachment proceedings against an American president. But the inquiry into President Biden is not like Donald Trump’s two.
One reason is the distinct lack of evidence linking Biden to actual wrongdoing, with the unproven allegations generally focusing on whether Biden benefited from his son Hunter’s business dealings. Another is that public support for the inquiry just isn’t where it was for either of Trump’s impeachments. Yet another is that we’ve seen significant early pushback from inside the impeachment-pushing party — which was not the case with the Trump impeachments.
Wp Get the full experience.Choose your plan ArrowRight
Some House Republicans say that they worry in general about another impeachment but also that the evidence isn’t there even for an inquiry. Several Senate Republicans have given the effort the cold shoulder.
Advertisement
That resistance matters.
Not only does it cast bipartisan doubt on House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s decision, but it raises the prospect that this whole effort could ultimately fall apart in a closely divided House — one in which McCarthy (R-Calif.) has only around five GOP votes to spare.
The biggest rebuke would be if McCarthy can’t ultimately get a majority of the House to vote to impeach Biden. Even short of that, impeaching Biden while losing a handful of Republican votes — and possibly seeing further Republican departures in a Senate trial — would be a significant setback.
The way these things generally work is that enough members of a party ultimately fall in line, for fear of embarrassing their leadership and party. But members like the 18 House Republicans in districts Biden won in 2020 have their own careers to think about. And it’s not clear McCarthy even had the votes for an inquiry; he promised less than two weeks ago that the House would vote on one, but then flip-flopped on Tuesday and launched it unilaterally.
Advertisement
Both that flip-flop and the political pressure McCarthy is getting from the right would seem to suggest this exercise is not particularly well conceived.
But here we are. And there is, in all likelihood, no turning back on ultimately voting on impeaching Biden. So which House Republicans are worth watching?
Below we list some of those who have been the most publicly skeptical — breaking down how firm their skepticism appears to be — in rough order of who is most interesting.
1. Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.)
The Colorado congressman has become an unlikely critic of his party’s exploits in recent months. The tea party conservative and Freedom Caucus member has expressed deep skepticism not just about impeaching Biden, but also his party’s claims of the “weaponization” of the government.
“The time for impeachment is the time when there’s evidence linking President Biden — if there’s evidence linking President Biden — to a high crime or misdemeanor,” Buck said as recently as Sunday. “That doesn’t exist right now.”
Advertisement
Last week he said: “Right now, I’m not convinced that that evidence exists. And I’m not supporting an impeachment inquiry.”
That certainly leaves open the possibility that the evidence could ultimately be there. But Buck is one of the few who have said explicitly that the current evidence doesn’t even rise to the level of an inquiry. And Buck, a former prosecutor, appears particularly emboldened of late to take principled stands against his party’s drift toward extreme measures.
Also: An aide reportedly told the Messenger on Tuesday that Buck believed the inquiry was a “waste of time.”
2. Rep. David Joyce (R-Ohio)
Joyce has likewise criticized both his party’s impeachment push and its “weaponization” efforts. And also like Buck, he criticized the impeachment push even in recent days.
He told Forbes in an interview published Monday that he is “not seeing facts or evidence at this point” that would warrant an impeachment inquiry, calling it “premature.” He also told The Washington Post in July that the House should instead focus on things like appropriations bills.
Advertisement
As with Buck, that doesn’t preclude his ultimately coming around. But the House GOP investigative efforts have proved more adept at producing smoke than anything substantial. And again, he’s saying not even an inquiry — a seemingly low political bar to clear — is warranted.
3. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.)
Bacon has joined Buck and Joyce in saying that evidence that Biden did anything criminal simply isn’t there for an inquiry.
“There should be a direct link to the president in some evidence,” he told the Hill in late August. “We should have some clear evidence of a high crime or misdemeanor, not just assuming there may be one. I think we need to have more concrete evidence to go down that path.”
Share this article Share
He added Tuesday that there should have been a vote on the inquiry and said of the idea that Biden committed a crime: “I think I’m gonna say he didn’t, but we got to — we should dig that stuff up before we go down this path.”
Advertisement
Bacon represents one of those 18 Biden-Republican districts; it favored Biden by six points. But he is a close McCarthy ally, and his comments allow for that evidence ultimately being there.
4. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.)
Perhaps the House GOP’s preeminent moderate, Fitzpatrick has repeatedly emphasized that impeachment must clear a very high bar.
“I feel like, you know, both in the last cycle and in this cycle, we’re converting into essentially a vote of no confidence in the British Parliament,” he said last month. “And I don’t want to see our country go down that path.”
Those comments indeed echo how Fitzpatrick handled both of Trump’s impeachments. On both the Ukraine impeachment and the post-Jan. 6 impeachment, he voted against them while being highly critical of Trump’s conduct. He said during the first impeachment that impeachment should be “a constitutional nuclear option of last resort.”
Advertisement
That places Fitzpatrick in the position of agreeing that whatever might be shown about Biden rises to the level of going “nuclear.”
5. Rep. Michael Lawler (R-N.Y.)
New York’s GOP delegation could be a focal point, given that it contains six of the 18 Biden-Republican districts. And perhaps most worth watching is Lawler, whose district favored Biden by 10 points.
Lawler has also been the most publicly cautious about impeachment.
“For me, with respect to impeachment, we’re not there yet,” Lawler told CNN last month. “It is not about focusing on the impeachment; it is a question of, do the facts and evidence warrant any further action.”
Lawler on Tuesday issued a statement that didn’t address the propriety of McCarthy’s move but downplayed it as merely “a continuation of the investigations that are currently open and ongoing.”
Advertisement
(Also worth watching from the New York GOP delegation: Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, who hails from the most heavily Biden district of any House Republican, and indicted congressman George Santos, who has said he currently opposes impeachment. “A cheap impeachment … degrades the significance of impeachment standards,” Santos said.)
6. Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.)
Now we’re getting into members who, despite raising concerns about the lack of evidence against Biden, are supporting the inquiry.
But Johnson did say he hasn’t seen enough evidence for impeachment yet.
“There is a constitutional and legal test that you have to meet with evidence,” Johnson told CNN in recent days. “I have not seen that evidence, but I guess I’m not suggesting it doesn’t exist. I do think the fact that the committees continue to ask for additional documents suggests that they don’t think their evidentiary record is complete yet.”
Advertisement
Johnson said Tuesday that an inquiry is important to figure out “whether or not the President has been involved” in Hunter Biden’s business — seemingly confirming he’s not convinced the president was.
7. Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.)
Hill this weekend went on the Sunday shows and suggested that impeachment was rather distant — that the investigations to this point hadn’t done the kind of detailed work you need “before someone goes to, you know, an impeachment activity.”
He added, “We don’t want to repeat the mistakes we think that Nancy Pelosi made by prematurely moving to impeachment during the Trump administration.”
But then McCarthy did arguably launch into “impeachment activity” via the inquiry. And Hill indicated Tuesday that he supported the inquiry.
Share
Comments
Loading...
View more