The Russian collusion narrative has long been divorced from all known facts, but its intention was always political in nature. The fruits of this political sabotage have developed into growing talk of obstruction. The basic theory goes that Trump tried to get Comey to go easy on Flynn and when he refused Trump fired him. There are smart people on both sides of this debate, such as those here and here. The case against Trump seems a little more contrived by my reading, but the debate is largely superfluous since impeachment is a political process. To impeach President Trump, not only would a majority of the House need to agree, but two thirds of the Senate would as well. With an easily defensible position, there’s no way Republicans move for impeachment on the thin obstruction charges. Doing so would fracture the party and dash hopes of legislative success. So long as the position is politically defensible, and that’s an elastic range in this day, Republicans will not move forward with impeachment proceedings and would be foolish to do so.

If Democrats cannot get Republicans on board there is no path for impeachment. As the refrain goes, you only get one shot at the king. Unless something substantial comes to light, Democrats drumming for impeachment are only damaging any future prospects of the idea. While it may deal significant damage to Trump’s numbers in the short term, it also inoculates him from the charge in the future. The Democrats’ best path for political success runs through the house in 2018, but the continued cultivation of partisan intent risks politically handicapping their possible future use of congressional investigative powers.