GOP Impeachment Efforts Hit a Brick Wall

Republican impeachment efforts against President Biden and his cabinet appear to have hit a brick wall after the Senate quickly rejected articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

Senators rejected two articles of impeachment Wednesday after less than three hours of procedural wrangling, ending the House GOP’s yearlong effort to remove Mayorkas with a whimper.

And despite some Republican interest in moving forward with a push to impeach Biden, the path to doing so appears increasingly closed and many Republicans in Congress say they are ready to drop all impeachment-related issues.

“I don’t think we can do anything,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the effort to impeach Mayorkas, in response to a question from The Hill shortly after Wednesday’s votes . .

“I mean, if we had courage in the House, we could refuse to fund a salary – there are things like that in the next budget process… If Republicans remember that controlling the House means having the power of money, we can do all kinds of things. We really can. We can do anything, but this requires leadership that has the courage to move forward. And we don’t have that now.”

Conservatives came into the current Congress promising to hold Biden administration officials — and the president himself — accountable.

While the negative vote on Mayorkas’ impeachment ended the legislative effort to make him the face of the border crisis, House conservatives have no shortage of names of Biden officials they have suggested for possible impeachment.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and even FBI Director Christopher Wray have had resolutions filed to oust them from their positions, but none have gone anywhere.

At the top of the list, however, is the president himself, with a trio of House committees investigating Biden and his family.

For House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), Wednesday’s events in the Senate cemented the belief that the best way to end its investigation into the president was with criminal referrals to the Department of Justice, and not with an impeachment vote.

It’s an idea he floated before the Senate proceedings on Mayorkas, and which skeptics say is a way to avoid a difficult vote in the House — although Comer said such a vote is still on the table.

“That’s why I’ve always said I think the best path to accountability is criminal referrals,” he said Wednesday. “But at the end of the day, you know, we have a problem here where we believe impeachable crimes have been committed. So, what you do? I mean, you have a constitutional responsibility. It’s a shame the Senate didn’t take this more seriously.”

Still, several members of the House insisted that the Senate’s quick impeachment did not dampen their appetite for impeachment.

“Look, we should always do what we think is appropriate. If the Senate does not accept a properly formed past impeachment, it is their fault. I mean, there’s nothing we can do constitutionally to do anything about it. These are all just political consequences,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas).

“Mayorkas deserved impeachment, he was impeached, this will be part of history forever as it should be. … And I think if we have another person who needs to be impeached, we should pursue it for the appropriate reasons. That’s our job. If the Senate is not going to convict, that is up to the Senate.”

Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) also called for careful consideration of “responsibly used” impeachments.

“I think it’s a complete dereliction of duty to not conduct the entire trial process,” he said, borrowing a term the House once considered an indictment of Mayorkas.

But he said that doesn’t dampen enthusiasm in the House.

“Let’s do our job. And we’re going to do it [with] integrity to the process. We will do this with care and consideration, as it should be. But let’s not make light of it here just because [Senate Majority Leader] Chuck Schumer is not willing to do his job in the Senate.”

House Rules Committee Ranking Member Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said he had no doubt his colleagues across the aisle would move forward.

“The crazy people will remain crazy here,” he said.

“They’ll continue to do things that don’t make sense and, you know, they’re hungry for attention. Maybe they didn’t receive enough love in childhood. I do not know what it is. But they will continue to do so. I don’t expect them to be waiting for the insanity to end. I wish so. But they seem to keep doing the same stupid things over and over again.”

Across the Capitol, senators widely hope Wednesday’s brief proceedings will bring an end to their impeachment work for the year.

While most Republicans remain upset with the way Mayorkas’ impeachment trial was concluded, they do not want a third presidential impeachment trial to fail in a matter of just six years. They are also content to let things play out at the ballot box in just over six months.

“It didn’t take much time in the chamber, but it distracted us from a lot of other things we needed to deal with,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (RN.C.). “I hope we learn from this and this just [does] it will not become a standard part of the process when there are different parties in the White House and House in charge.”

Part of the momentum Tillis points to is Wednesday’s trial, which takes up a full workday, when the chamber could be dealing with the reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Senators are trying to reach an agreement to vote before the deadline, midnight on Friday, to avoid a lapse in the program.

Some conservative senators see ending impeachment as an option for the rest of the year for a different reason. They argue that Schumer’s call to reject the articles before a trial can even take place will likely ward off any further attempts this year.

“I would say impeachment could be done for a long time once you set the precedent of not having a trial for the first time. It was devalued by what Schumer did, and I think you can expect that kind of thing to happen if they start it on the other side,” said Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.).

“I think it was a terrible precedent to set,” he added.