With the latest obscenity lame duck president Donald Trump has thrusted onto our nation with his ongoing fight to overturn the November election and his egregiously abusive phone call to Georgia election officials, members of Congress should seriously consider impeaching Trump after the inauguration of President-elect January 20th.

Yes, it’s true:   we’ve trod unsuccessfully down this path before, but there’s still a legitimate purpose for proceeding with impeachment after Trump leaves office, and I believe it has a higher likelihood of success.

First things first:  why would you impeach a politician who’s already out of office?  (If you question the legality of such an act, I’ll let this Washington Post column respond to that.)  According to the Constitution, there are two things that can happen when an impeached person is successfully convicted.  The first is automatic:  the individual is kicked out of office.

It’s the second, however, that makes Trump’s impeachment not just prudent, but perhaps necessary.The Constitution includes the provision that the Senate can vote, in a separate motion, to permanently ban that person from holding federal office, either as an elected official or as an appointed judge.

This cannot be understated:  Trump was, is and will be always unfit to hold public office.  He’s literally proved it during the single term he’s held in his political life.  He is incapable of governing by the rule of law.  He abuses his office to reward friends and supporters.

And should Trump opt to give himself a pardon for all acts he undertook while in office, he would face no federal repercussions for actions he will have implicitly admitted were criminal acts.  (Such a pardon, of course, would be challenged in Court, simply as a matter of Constitutionality, but it’s likely Trump would not face federal charges for years.)  But a pardon cannot be prevented nor wiped away by a Presidential pardon.

A Trump Impeachment Won’t Be “Overturning an Election”

There were two primary arguments those in the Trump camp offered for not supporting impeachment in 2020.  The first was that nothing Trump had done in dealing with the Ukrainian government was illegal because he was doing his job as president; the second was that this was just another effort by Democrats to overturn the 2016 election.

Both of those arguments would be moot in a post-office impeachment.  Trump would be impeached for abuse of office for trying to pressure various state government officials to disenfranchise millions of voters in a half-dozen states.  Trump did not do this as a citizen; he did this with the imprimatur of the Office of the President of the United States.  He made the calls from the Oval Office.  He held meetings with state elections officers from at least one state in the Oval Office.

Let’s also not forget that he publicly threatened aid to states dealing with natural disasters and the coronavirus pandemic unless officials in those states endorsed his re-election and campaign efforts.

These are not the duties of the President of the United States.  In fact, they’re counter to the oath of office to faithfully execute the duties of the President.

The second Republican defense is now moot.  This isn’t about overturning an election; this is all about defending an election.  It’s about making sure that it is not right Trump–and no future president–uses his office to overturn the legal votes of Americans.

A preemptive shot at future Republican malfeasance

Many Republicans see the folly in Trump’s continued attempts to undermine the vote and the Electoral College.  A number–though not all–recognize how it endangers Republicans’ chances of winning the White House in the future.  As a group of Republican House members correctly noted in a statement Monday, the GOP presidential candidate has won the popular vote just once since 1992–and in that case, GW Bush’s campaign in 2004–was a reelection effort.  They recognize that by empowering the President, the Vice President or Congress to unilaterally void the votes of the Electoral College would devastate any potential Republican candidate because of the diminishing attraction of Republican policies.

By impeaching Trump for his interference in the Electoral College vote and his intimidation tactics to override state officials, lawmakers would caution future leaders from attempting similar stunts.  Even Republicans–not the Trump cult members, but true conservatives and moderate Republicans–know defending the Constitution and election integrity is more important than protecting Trump’s legacy.

Even Susan Collins knows Trump didn’t learn

Susan Collins, the Republican Senator from Maine, insisted that Trump shouldn’t have been convicted in his 2020 impeachment because being impeached was a lesson enough.  “I believe that the President has learned from this case,” she said, adding he “will be much more cautious in the future.”

Obviously, that’s not true.

Trump didn’t learn anything.  In fact, his acquittal emboldened him.  Should he somehow land in a federal office in the future, Trump would *still* be emboldened to act in any way he wants in the future.  He’ll continue to subvert democracy.  He’ll continue to put his personal interests in front of his public duty.

Mitt Romney stood up to Trump in 2020.  The Republican Senators who were thought to be on the fence about convicting Trump–like Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Rob Portman of Ohio, and Collins–as well as retiring Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania–could see a clear path to vote for impeachment.

And let’s get cynical for a second:  other Senators who plan to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024–people like Marco Rubio of Florida, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and even Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky–may find this a quick and easy way to ensure Trump won’t run in 2024.

The 2024 money machine

If you’re a Republican running for office with a divisive figure like Trump potentially in a national race, do you want him and his selected down-ticket candidates syphoning money from your campaign?  No, you don’t.

By barring Trump from running for office in the future, you take away Trump’s money-raising operation.  He can’t set up a exploratory committee to fundraise.  He can’t solicit funds, at any point, with the idea that he’ll use it in a campaign.  (And it’s a great way to slyly get back at Trump by shutting off the funnel of money he’ll use for personal use.)

Sure, he can set up a PAC to support candidates, but would Trump do that?  I mean, that would require work on his part to distribute funds and actually go out an campaign for someone else who cannot help him in any way.  Do you think Trump would do that much work for anyone else?  No way in hell.

And if you’re a donor, would you send money to support a Trump PAC given his history of using donated money to prop up his personal lifestyle (and that of his family) as well as pay his legal bills?  Nope, you want it to go to politicians who can do things for you in office.

“Trump fatigue” will set in soon

Republicans will say Democrats are undertaking impeachment of the out-of-office Trump simply because they don’t like Trump.  Well, yeah, that’s true:  we don’t.

But Americans don’t like Trump either.  Trump lost the popular vote by 7 million votes.  His popularity never reached about 50%.  The more he complains about his loss, the less popular he becomes.  Polling shows Trump’s handling of the election is even lower than his personal and job approval ratings.

Republicans will have to not just defend Trump, but also his term in office, when he tried to bully state election officials to void tens of millions of ballots.  And his handling of the coronavirus.  And his upcoming state criminal charges in New York.  And all the messes he’ll cause in the two years out of office (like, say, whatever his ghost writer puts in his post-term memoir).

Republicans defending Trump will be the greatest election tool in the Democrats’ midterm playbook.  The argument won’t have anything to do with the job Biden-Harris is doing–which can only be an improvement–but instead, it’ll put Republicans on their heels for wanting to defend a man who tried to undermine voters’ will.  It’s a losing proposition for the Republicans in the increasing number of Purple districts.

So, I say yes, impeach Trump in Spring 2021, after an investigation into his malfeasance in the post-election era.  The outcome for Democrats–and smart Republicans–can only be positive.