There has been no shortage of tough talk from prominent Democrats on the topic of impeachment following House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s decision to officially characterize the existing congressional investigations against President Donald Trump as part of a formal impeachment probe.
From 2020 Democratic presidential primary candidates to longtime congressmen — from moderately bipartisan Democrats like former Vice President Joe Biden to the radical progressive members of “the squad” — it was made clear this week that impeachment had become the unanimous party line.
The only difference is that, unlike Rep. Rashida “Impeach the Motherf—–!” Tlaib of Michigan and her band of freshman impeachment zealots, a great many of these tough-talking impeachment supporters have not been long for the cause.
In fact, some were singing exactly the opposite tune just a few presidential administrations ago, when former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his impassioned Republican revolutionaries sought to impeach then-Democratic President Bill Clinton.
House Judiciary Chairman Nadler, for example, has spent a significant amount of time pressuring Pelosi to pursue the unpopular measure — even as the Russian collusion narrative fizzled out entirely with the release of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
“Personally, I think the president ought to be impeached,” Nadler said less than two weeks ago, according to Politico, around the time that Pelosi declared in a closed-door meeting the party lacked the votes for impeachment.
“This is formal impeachment proceedings,” Nadler told CNN in August. “We are investigating all the evidence, we’re gathering the evidence.”
“We will at the conclusion of this — hopefully by the end of the year — vote to vote articles of impeachment to the House floor,” he added.
But a much different side of Nadler can be seen in a 1998 video showcasing the New York Democrat’s feelings toward the impeachment push against Clinton, who had lied under oath about a sexual affair with a White House intern.
At that time, Nadler saw impeachment as a partisan process — the “undoing” of a duly elected president for purely political reasons.
“An impeachment of a president is an undoing of a national election,” Nadler at an anti-impeachment rally in 1998.
“And one of the reasons we all feel so angry about what they are doing is that they are ripping … asunder our votes,” he said. “They are telling us our votes don’t count and that the election must be set aside.”
🚨NADLER IN 1998🚨
AT AN ANTI-IMPEACHMENT RALLY:
“An impeachment of a President is an undoing of a National Election” pic.twitter.com/zMOuxVaqqi
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) September 25, 2019
Of course, now the impeachment of a duly elected president is simply justice at work and nothing more — at least that’s how Nadler sees it.
And Nadler is far from the only Democrat to have flip-flopped so strongly on the issue of impeachment.
Biden, though not so staunch in his support for the measure in recent weeks, was set firmly in opposition to it as a senator during the Clinton administration.
“The American people don’t think that they have made a mistake by electing Bill Clinton,” Biden said in 1998.
“And we in Congress had better be very careful before we upset their decision, and make darn sure that we are able to convince them if we decide to upset their decision that our decision to impeach him was based upon principle and not politics.”
1998 Joe Biden sounds A LOT different than 2019 Joe Biden on the topic of Impeachment! pic.twitter.com/PSgR6siF3p
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) September 24, 2019
The same standard is less of a concern for the Delaware Democrat these days as his fellow partisans seek to unseat Trump — a man who won the office of the president by promising to raze the works of the administration in which Biden was vice president.
As for Nadler and the rest, however — they’ve shown themselves to be nothing more than partisan hacks.
Nadler and his ilk lack any semblance of honor, decency or respect for the United States Constitution.
Having used it as a shield to defend their man in 1998, they would seek to burn it for an opportunity to unseat a president they disagree with today.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.