To be non-snarky and nice to Occam, I'm all in favor of Congress refinding its various powers that are checks, and I've long advocated for regular impeachment of the President including as I mention often impeaching Bush prior to both Iraq and even 9/11.
But for most people, including members of Congress, impeachment is associated not only with conviction but removal from office. Neither of these have ever happened to the President, at both trials the Senate majority wouldn't even convict. Many people do not think Bill Clinton was impeached because he was not removed, and even fewer know the actual charges he faced at the Senate trial.
As such, impeachment, of any kind, is seen as an extreme measure. It's a special weapon held in reserve not a regular check. Again, even to members of Congress. And there's basically no way that a Senate minority will be holding a trial of Trump in an election year. Democrats have been successfully pushing out the talking points about how impeachment is not the trial/conviction/removal to people who are Democratic shills but they're obviously leery of how that will go beyond that group. This is a huge reason why every President who has faced impeachment was a lame duck with an opposition Senate.
I'm totally on board with impeaching Trump (although I will admit for the record that this reason probably would not make my short list) but I can see all kinds of valid political reasons for the House to not even seriously try to report on the inquiry until 2021 at the earliest. And none of this really imperils the Republic when there's still a strong chance that Trump can simply just lose in 2020.
