It is clear from the link, that the founders were far from being united on the issue of impeachment or the grounds for impeachment. I think the term high crimes and misdemeanors was a catch all used to define a multitude offenses some legal infractions and some not.All go to subverting the office to which elected. I'm not sure about the context of "appointing unfit subordinates." "Unfit" is an ambiguous or broad adjective. We can argue about judges we don't like, but qualifications are a more objective standard, for example. But the link also indicates that whatever wrong the person being impeached has done is so sever that it cannot wait to be addressed until another election. I think that's correct. One test I've seen is that the infraction itself must result in the official being made incapable of carrying out his/her duty.Many people probably think that "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” But this interpretation is mistaken.So what is a high crime? It is something from England. Impeachment is not a criminal trial but a political process.Democrats (Leftists) seem to have a real problem with the process for criminal prosecution.
First, there has to be a "crime" (...high crimes and misdemeanors...), THEN you can start to think about prosecuting it.
It's not that complicated.
The term does go back to English law and was used to remove officials in colonies. In fact it was a fairly common term in 18 the century. Most of the framers of the constitution knew the phrase well.
Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, not spending money allocated by Parliament, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, losing a ship by neglecting to moor it, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” granting warrants without cause, and bribery. Some of these charges were crimes. Others were not. The one common denominator in all these accusations was that the official had somehow abused the power of his office and was unfit to serve.
High Crimes and Misdemeanors - Constitutional Rights Foundation
When a president faces the strong possibility of impeachment he begins to loose support from his own party making it difficult to carry out the duties of his office. Trump was never the choice of the leadership within his party. They only begrudgingly gave him their support after it was clear he would be nominated. I suspect much of his support in congress would disappear upon passage of a bill of impeachment.
You expect more from the "spineless" Republicans than I do...