Shorter Wall Street Journal: Donald Trump Is Too Stupid to Be Impeached

The paper’s editorial board mounts a curious defense of the president.

Ron Sachs/ZUMA

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.
As more Americans back the impeachment inquiry each day, President Donald Trump and his allies have relied on a string of curious defenses, as well as questionable legal acumen, to protect Trump from the mounting threat to his presidency. Trump has baselessly asserted that the stock market would tank if he’s removed from office. Former acting attorney general Matthew Whitaker attempted to come to Trump’s aid this week with his astonishing declaration on national television that “abuse of power is not a crime.”
 
Today, the Wall Street Journal editorial board has chimed in with a bizarre, new argument for why Trump should not be impeached: he’s simply too inept. No, seriously.
Intriguingly, Mr. Taylor says in his statement that many people in the Administration opposed the Giuliani effort, including some in senior positions at the White House. This matters because it may turn out that while Mr. Trump wanted a quid-pro-quo policy ultimatum toward Ukraine, he was too inept to execute it. Impeachment for incompetence would disqualify most of the government, and most Presidents at some point or another in office.
The editorial continued by echoing the current Republican grumbling that the probe should be more transparent, a demand that culminated in yesterday’s publicity stunt featuring a herd of white, male Republicans storming a closed-door impeachment hearing held in a secure facility. There, they ordered pizza for reporters. Some whipped out their phones, in violation of security protocol.
 
If that’s too much stupid for you, we’ll leave you with this:

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate