In light of recent events, it's likely that the two potential 2024 general election candidates could be battling serious legal issues. The House has begun its impeachment inquiry of President Biden, despite the lack of substantial evidence of any high crimes and misdemeanors provided by Republicans. At the same time, Donald Trump is challenged with 91 federal and state criminal charges. His campaign appears to be claiming a victory following a new pause in his federal election subversion trial set to commence in March.
The reality of the situation reveals that this so-called victory might not be so clear cut. The Trump campaign aims to delay the trial, perchance to clear the path for a potential presidential run. However, this plan may encounter several roadblocks. The judge in Trump's case has not vacated the dates, but merely put them on hold, and plans to curate a final decision after further reviews. This could lead to a potential delay in the trial, but it would not necessarily imply a definite halt.
In the case of the impeachment inquiry of President Biden, every single Republican, including those hailing from Biden-founded districts, voted affirmative. While this step is popular among Republicans, it might not represent one of the chief driving forces. The primary purpose here seems to be to combat perceptions of a two-tier system of justice, which is viewed as unfair by 78% of Republicans who feel there should be equivalent standards applied on both frontlines.
Twitter Post On Trump Campaign Claims Pause in Trial as 'Big Win'
Despite this, the impeachment inquiry commenced without substantial evidence that guarantees any high crimes and misdemeanors committed by Biden. This has raised some eyebrows as it hints at the normalizing of impeachment prospects for any individual bathed in the vaguest veil of suspicion. For some Republicans, there's a belief that something unsavory is at play in regards to money changing hands; however, whether an impeachment inquiry is the appropriate vehicle to uncover this remains questionable.
In conclusion, moving forward with an impeachment inquiry in the absence of a concrete legal basis seems premature, and this methodology might be skewing towards retaliation singularity — straying far from its original purpose. There are certain pre-emptive steps that ought to be taken to ensure a just and proper investigative process before leaping towards impeachment. If done correctly, it can act as a robust tool for holding presidents accountable, but using it as a form of retaliation might not be conducive for the American justice system.
