Home Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., dismissed studies that Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey plans to go away the Democratic Get together to change into a Republican.
“What he is reacting to is public polling that exhibits he cannot get renominated,” Nadler stated Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” “His citizens in his district is 24 p.c to renominate him and 60 p.c to appoint anyone else.”
Van Drew — who has spent months criticizing fellow Democrats for his or her push to question Trump — met with Trump on Friday to debate going throughout social gathering strains. He’s one among solely two Democrats who voted towards opening an impeachment inquiry into Trump and has remained a fervent voice in opposition to impeaching the president.
HOUSE DEM RAILS AGAINST IMPEACHMENT PUSH: ‘EVERYTHING OUR COUNTRY DOESN’T STAND FOR’
“Wow, that might be massive,” Trump tweeted early Sunday morning of Van Drew’s deliberate social gathering change. “All the time heard Jeff may be very good!”
The information of Van Drew’s potential social gathering flip drew harsh criticism from Democrats, who referred to as it a political transfer geared toward turning round his flagging approval numbers in New Jersey’s 2nd Congressional District.
A current inside ballot carried out for the Democrats discovered that 58 p.c of main voters in his district wished to appoint one other candidate, whereas solely 28 p.c stated Van Drew ought to be renominated.
Whereas different Democrats have sought in charge Van Drew’s looming exit from the social gathering on low approval rankings, critics declare that it has extra to do with the upcoming vote on impeaching President Trump. The complete Home is anticipated to vote on articles of impeachment this upcoming week and Van Drew has been an adamant detractor of the method from the beginning.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Nadler on Sunday, nonetheless, argued that the impeachment course of is an even bigger concern than simply social gathering politics.
“This isn’t political,” he stated. “We shouldn’t be taking a look at these issues. That is the protection of our democracy. Can we keep a democratic republic or can we flip right into a tyranny?”