To impeach Trump is not to eject him from the White House. An impeachment is similar to an indictment. The “grand jury” that decides on an impeachment is the U.S. House. The “jury” is the U.S. Senate. If the House decides to impeach, the news is sent over to the Senate, which then decides, by debating and voting, that he or she is guilty as charged or not. Only if the Senate’s verdict on Trump is “guilty” would he have to leave the White House and go back to the former life he so enjoyed and live again at Trump Tower, Mar-a-Lago, or anywhere else.
The House’s vote on whether to take its preliminary steps to impeach might be yes, and the process could begin. To think this through together, though, let’s guess that the motion to investigate concerning whether to impeach fails. No action now.
Well, as I see it, those trying now to impeach Trump would have done their duty to their grandchildren and the country, and two Novembers from now the voting people of the United States would have an absolutely clear record vote, impeach Trump or don’t, on which to ground their own votes on the election or re-election of all the 435 House members, and, if it had come to a Senate vote, a third of the 100 U.S. senators. If the Democrats took back the House in 2018, then, if a second attempt was still needed, the pro-impeachment members would have the votes to move against Trump just as the House moved against Nixon in 1973.
Common sense dictates that any member of Congress with an interest in truth or the Constitution wait until the 2018 midterms before instituting impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump. After all, the House now is dominated by Trump's own party, and they don't seem too ruffled by anything he does. But in this latest essay, Ronnie Dugger gives an equally common sense reason for starting the impeachment call (as well as a useful recap of how impeachment works). He writes:
Ronnie also offers a nice recap of Trump administration acts that will drag the country further to the right, from Neil Gorsuch's appointment to the Supreme Court and likely many right-wing judges now named to the lower courts; hand more economic power over to the rich and their immediate dependents through attacks on Medicare, the ACA repeal, and a revised tax policy; and bring us closer to both boots-on-the-ground war and the possibility of more impulsive missile strikes. The stakes are certainly high enough that the call to get House and possibly Senate "On the record, vote yes, vote no, or abstain!" on the future of a Trump presidency will be a welcome clarification of hundreds of 2018 candidates' stands on executive power and the Constitution.