I Think They're Counting On The Dershowitz Defense

A 2020 senior Trump campaign official texts: “Maybe there’s no one in the WH willing to defend the president against impeachment to members.” https://t.co/5cdG4krZbZ

— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) January 13, 2021

As stated by Judge Michael Luttig:

This is to say that the Senate's power under the Constitution is only to convict (or not) an incumbent president.

— @judgeluttig (@judgeluttig) January 11, 2021

There are two fundamental problems with that analysis:

This tweet epitomizes the central flaw in Judge Luttig’s argument that you can’t impeach Trump after 1/20: It reads the Senate’s power to disqualify from future office right out of the Constitution—ignoring both its independent importance and how his reading would eviscerate it. https://t.co/JLk1uv5MR4

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) January 13, 2021

Judge Luttig never address what purpose the disqualification power serves if officers can just resign moments before removal; and he assumes #SCOTUS would resolve a dispute without mentioning its 1993 holding that impeachment challenges are non-justiciable “political questions.” https://t.co/S1IRWqK2vf

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) January 12, 2021

IMHLO, that last point is decisive:  if the court won't review "political questions," what constitutes a valid impeachment is not up to the courts.  Not to mention Trump's probably going to be too busy fending off criminal investigations and trials to bother with another Presidential campaign.  He's also going to be four years older in 2024, and I don't think this particular effort is going to feed his ego that much longer.  Especially not while his commercial "empire" is collapsing around his ears.