[Yo-Yo]

That of course is the real danger here - tit-for-tat responses as the political center gyroscopically spins out of control. However, once a bully begins those in the right have no option but to respond.

One could argue that we have been going through that already vis a vis Special Prosecutors/Special Counsel.

It started with Archibald Cox and Nixon, then with Special/Independent Counsels investigating Reagan (Iran-Contra Lawrence Walsh,) Clinton (Whitewater Ken Starr,) and Dubya (Valerie Plame Patrick Fitzgerald)

Obama escaped the special counsel treatment, but then Trump had Mueller.

[semantic]

Yes, more good points. I would, however observe the SC is still technically part of the executive (albeit 'independent'), and that of course he was bound by well established legal standards. (Including judiciary oversight/recourse.)

Impeachment - as currently being utilized - is a whole new avenue of approach, one that violates long term 'gentlemen' understandings. I think of it as WMD - say mustard gas - treaties didn't outlaw war, just the use of chemical weapons. Once everyone realized what would happen in a tit-for-tat situation, they were abandoned.

So, here are the proglibs thinking they have this novel, shiny new powerful and amazing weapon. I mean, it doesn't even engage the judiciary - whoopee! Someone needs to remind them it was always there, always dangerous, and should only be pulled out as a last, stop gap measure to repeal an actual monster/tyrant.