We have fascinating and dangerous news out of Pennsylvania. Republicans in the state’s GOP dominated state legislature have filed articles of impeachment against Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner. If you’re not familiar with the players here, Krasner is one of the country’s most prominent reform DAs – and one of the first to win an election in a major American city back in 2017. Meanwhile there has been a spike in gun violence in the city and the murder rate has risen substantially. Krasner and his supporters argue that these shifts are mirrored across the country and are not a result of his policies. Republican critics and some Democrats disagree.

But here’s where this becomes more than just standard politics.

HuffPost has a piece up about the Progressives’ Ukraine letter. It matches with our basic assumptions about what happened. They actually confirmed one point I suggested was the case. The letter was being revised over time. The letter as released wasn’t identical to the letter that people signed back in the summer, though from what I can tell the differences were minor and didn’t change the thrust of the document. The reference to the September annexations was added in recent weeks.

The Progressive Caucus has now withdrawn the Ukraine letter in its entirety, saying it was the released by staff without vetting. “The letter was drafted several months ago, but unfortunately was released by staff without vetting,” writes Pramila Jayapal in a just released statement. “As Chair of the Caucus, I accept responsibility for this.” She goes on to say that the proximity in time to Rep. McCarthy’s threats to discontinue aid to Ukraine led to misunderstandings.

At least two signatories to the Progressive Caucus Ukraine letter have now said that the letter was circulated and signed back in June and July, notwithstanding the fact that it was dated and publicized on October 24th. Rep. Sarah Jacobs says she signed the letter on June 30th. Rep. Mark Pocan says he signed it in July. Both suggest they didn’t know it was going to be released yesterday. Jacobs says she wouldn’t sign it today. Pocan said on Twitter “I agree the timing makes little sense. It was from July.”

I was reading more commentary on this Progressive Caucus letter calling for negotiations to end the Russo-Ukraine war. Some of the criticisms I’ve seen amount to, Putin is terrible. It’s a criminal regime. You can’t negotiate with a regime like that. I completely disagree with that.

Yes, criminal, terrible, all those things. But you have to be willing to negotiate with even the worst regimes. All the more so since this war very much does hold the risk of cataclysmic escalation. If the Russian government were to reach out today to Ukraine or the U.S. and say, we’re ready to withdraw to our own borders, what do we get in return? — that’s the basis of conversation. More realistically, perhaps they would say they want to talk on the basis of a return to the February 24th 2022 front lines. I am not sure that’s an acceptable resolution any more. But it’s at least the basis of discussions.

Yesterday 30 members of the House Progressive Caucus signed a letter urging President Biden to pursue direct negotiations with Russia and a diplomatic settlement to the Russo-Ukraine war. Given the fairly united support for Ukraine in the U.S. political class and fairly broad support among the public in general, the letter was bound to spur some controversy. But the letter itself was an incoherent mass of contradictions. It pressed for immediate negotiations and a ceasefire while also insisting on defending Ukraine and not taking any steps without Ukraine’s support. For the moment at least these are irreconcilable positions. Ukraine’s war aim is to drive Russia from most and likely all of its territory. Russia’s position is to annex large parts of Ukraine and force it into a permanently subordinate position to Russia. One side or another has to substantially shift its demands or there’s little to talk about. The letter could have said, “The threat of escalation and the danger to the global economy is so great that the U.S. needs to make Ukraine shift its goals.” But it didn’t. It stated two irreconcilable positions at once.

Then things got weird.

I’ve got a lot of stories I’m following at the moment. But I want to make sure you’re paying attention to the voter harassment situation in Arizona. I’m sure this is playing out in other states too. It simply may be more aggressive in Arizona or just as likely there’s better local press coverage. The reporting I’m following is from Nicole Grigg and Garrett Archer of ABC15 in Phoenix. Here’s Grigg’s report from Friday.

The gist of what’s happening is this.

These are anxious days for the Democrats’ electoral prospects. But I wanted to focus your attention on the Senate race in Ohio. I still think JD Vance is the likely winner of this race simply because there appears to be a late Republican tide in this cycle and because Ohio is just a Republican state. If it’s basically tied you have to imagine it is more likely than not that the substantial number of undecided voters break in the GOP direction. But that said, it is remarkable how close this race remains. Even as other Senate races have seen sizable Democratic margins drop to tiny leads or tied races, this one really has barely budged. Just over the last 24 hours there are two premium polls out from Marist and Siena which have the race at Vance +1 and tied, respectively.

Rishi Sunak will now be the next leader of the Conservative Party in the UK and the next Prime Minister, starting in just a few days. In a way, I guess it’s a positive that this has gotten so relatively little mention. But I cannot not note the history his ascension brings with it. I saw one reference this morning to Sunak’s being the first “person of color” to be the British Prime Minister. But this somewhat understates the matter.

As a strong GOP midterm showing looks more plausible, there are more and more threats and claims that Republicans will impeach President Biden or perhaps the DHS secretary or — who knows? — maybe everyone. I see people looking at this the wrong way. Who cares? Really, who cares? I do not care. Over the last quarter century Republicans have drained impeachment of any meaning or taint – first by impeaching a President over a triviality and then twice summarily dismissing an impeachment trial over grave presidential wrongdoing. People tell me that even if Biden would never be removed from office it still somehow taints his presidency. I disagree. And it is wrong to make it something Republicans somehow gain by, even if that gain is merely the psychic injury it imposes on their political opponents. The proper response to any threats about impeaching Biden or any of his appointees is to remind Republicans to definitely be sure to get a 67-seat majority in the Senate. Because otherwise, have at it and who cares?