Time to talk Trump impeachment: Jason Sattler

At the Constitutional Convention, James Madison imagined impeachment as a relief from a chief executive who “might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers.”

President Trump might have won Madison’s Triple Crown — in his first few weeks.

This is no exaggeration. The latest but far from only example is The Washington Post report that the White House, having failed to get the FBI director and deputy director to publicly rebut reports about contacts between Trump associates and Russian intelligence operatives before the 2016 election, then enlisted Congress and the intelligence community to knock down stories about the alleged connections.

And the goon squad attempting to limit the president’s PR damage reportedly includes the man Trump picked to lead the CIA and the chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence committees, who were Trump transition advisers and now are the two men most responsible for investigating Trump’s Russia ties.

The pair, Rep. Devin Nunes and Sen. Richard Burr, arguably are already derelict in their duties. They “should have started the investigation in August before the election and showed no interest in doing so,” says national security reporter Marcy Wheeler.

Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, meanwhile, instead of investigating what could be the greatest scandal in U.S. history, are focusing on the leaks that led Trump to ask Michael Flynn to step down as national security adviser.

Imagine Watergate with a Congress even more interested than the president in covering up potential high crimes and misdemeanors.

Trump meets match in 'tweet king' Dingell: Jason Sattler

Trump's denunciation of hate wasn't enough: Montel Williams

It's time for Democrats to start talking impeachment, even if it is less likely to happen under this Congress than the president giving up basic cable to learn ancient Greek so he can read some Plutarch.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi has said that Democrats should not use the I-word in reference to Trump until “when and if he breaks the law.” This not only misunderstands the Founders’ design of the ultimate check and balance, it also ignores that besides his foreign entanglements, Trump might already be in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.

Most important, Pelosi’s abeyance all but absolves Republicans of any responsibility to dig into potential Trumpian wrongdoing.

Let’s allow that Trump’s constant lying — more than 80 false claims in his first 30 days — and twitchy tweeting indicate that he’s at least no more incapacitated than he was during the campaign. Perhaps Trump’s possible coordination with Russian President Vladimir Putin, reflected in softened language on Russia in the GOP platform and his campaign's odd associations with pro-Russian forces, merely indicates he’s a huge fan of murderous thugs who compliment him.

But the question of whether Trump is engaged in schemes of self-gain at the expense of actual taxpayers demands thorough investigation, at the very least. Instead, House Republicans are acting as his defense lawyers, refusing to ask for his tax returns and burying investigations into his conflicts.

Meanwhile, members of Trump’s private Mar-a-Lago resort, where the membership fees recently doubled to $200,000, are enjoying direct access to the president and foreign leaders. And all of Trump’s businesses, which are inextricable from Trump’s persona, still benefit the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust — a trust that has been set up for the “exclusive benefit” of our president.

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media 

Trump beats deporter in chief: Raul Reyes

Ignoring your own party’s transgressions is standard politics, but the GOP has made fine art of it.

When Republicans are out of power they conjure scandals — such as #Benghazi, a tragedy in search of a crime. Now that they’re back in charge at the White House, they're trying to set records for how deeply they can push their heads into the sand.

Ethics watchdogs have already filed dozens of complaints against Trump. If Democrats don’t move swiftly, they could find themselves trailing both their base and public opinion, again.

A recent Public Policy Polling poll found 46% in favor of the House calling up the president on formal charges, a number that President Nixon didn’t see, according to historian Kevin M. Kruse, until 16 months into the Watergate crisis.

In contrast, only 35% of Americans backed the actual impeachment of President Clinton, in the days after the House had passed two charges against him.

Democrats have to set the stakes now for the 2018 election. A minority president with a negative mandate under a cloud of inscrutable suspicion is pursuing a largely unpopular agenda with possibly irreparable consequences.

If Republicans won’t check him, the voters must.

Jason Sattler, a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors, is a columnist for The National Memo. Follow him on Twitter @LOLGOP.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @USATOpinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.