Trump-defending Elise Stefanik's latest resolution could be too extreme for GOP lawmakers: analyst

Both Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and House Republican Conference chair Elise Stefanik (NY) have competing proposals for expunging Donald Trump's two impeachments from the Congressional Record and, surprisingly the New York Republican's has less of a chance of getting the needed votes because of some of her claims.

Last week both MAGA Republicans announced plans to rewrite history with regards Trump's 2019 impeachment trial for attempting to blackmail Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy into digging up dirt on now-President Joe Biden, as well as the 2021 impeachment trial for inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection that forced lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to flee for their lives.

As MSNBC analyst Hayes Brown explained, Greene's resolution is fairly straightforward and could pass the GOP-dominated House but Stefanik's, as it now stands, faces a more uncertain future.

In his column for MSNBC, Brown argued that while there are still questions over whether documentation of a historic event like an impeachment can be stripped, but a positive vote by the House would allow Trump to claim that he has been vindicated.

IN OTHER NEWS: Kevin McCarthy floats impeaching Merrick Garland

Having stated that, Brown said the wording of Stefanik's proposal may be a tough pill for swing district Republicans to swallow as they face re-election next year.

As he explained, "....the language of Stefanik’s resolution relating to Trump’s second impeachment may be more likely to fail. While not explicitly claiming the 2020 election was stolen, the preambulatory clauses more or less say there were plenty reasons to be skeptical of the results. Stefanik walks right up to that line in a clause that says Trump is the first president since Grover Cleveland in 1888 'to have increased his vote from his initial election and seemingly still not won reelection in the subsequent cycle.' That 'seemingly” is doing a lot of work."

Without revisions, Hayes suggests swing-district House Republicans might balk at having their names associated with it -- particularly since Trump may face additional indictments.

"After all, there are still potentially more criminal charges to come related to that saga, including in Georgia and from special counsel Jack Smith. But if Stefanik were to tone down the language and simply focus on the supposed technicalities that made up the Senate GOP’s reasoning for acquitting Trump in that case?" he wrote. "She might have a winner on her hands."

As for Trump, he claimed the former president would warmly welcome passage of either proposal.

"We saw the impeachments happen, and they’ve been imprinted on the national memory. But Trump would be able to say with a straight face on the campaign trail and the debate stage that he was actually never impeached — and for once, he wouldn’t be totally lying," he wrote.

You can read more here.