Barbara Lee is ready for impeachment proceedings to begin.Thursday, she told her constituents that "The Trump administration’s corrupt behavior surrounding the Mueller report has been startling to say the least. Both Trump and his right-wing surrogates have pushed blatant lies, twisting the truth in a thinly-veiled cover-up. After a nearly two-year long investigation into the Trump campaign’s criminal behavior, Special Counsel Robert Mueller made it clear: 'If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.' This is a big deal. After two years' worth of extensive interviews, intense background checks, and multiple convictions of Trump’s closest allies, Mueller could not clear Trump of any wrongdoing. And just last night, Trump admitted he would use dirt on political rivals from foreign governments. That’s right, Trump just welcomed foreign governments to interfere in our elections-- again... Mueller and his report gave the House everything we need to start impeachment proceedings."Jonathan Chait's headline was a provocative Trump Goes on TV to Solicit 2020 Foreign Collusion. "Trump," he wrote, "continues to show every sign of hoping and expecting to benefit from foreign collusion in 2020. In May, he intended to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to pressure the government to supply dirt on Joe Biden. He and his ally, Mitch McConnell, are blocking measures (including ones with bipartisan support) to help safeguard elections against foreign attacks and social-media propaganda. His message to Russia, or any other government that wants a close relationship with him, is obvious: Do anything you can to help me win. Trump also said the whole Republican caucus takes foreign dirt on their opponents. "When you go and talk, honestly, to congressmen, they all do it, they always have, and that’s the way it is. It’s called oppo research."That has made-- this whole controversy has made-- Republicans on Capitol Hill very nervous. McCarthy is trying, absurdly, to blame it all on Adam Schiff! Less sleazy Republicans than McCarthy-- pretty much meaning any other Republican-- are taking this more seriously. Tom Cole (R-OK): "I don’t think it’s appropriate to ever do anything like that and I think you have an obligation to pick up the phone and call the FBI if we know this is from a foreign government. I am just worried about the general carelessness of that remark. I don’t think that’s going to sit well with most Americans. It shouldn’t. It’s just not an appropriate way to behave in a political campaign." Mike McCaul, one of the most vulnerable Republicans being targeted for political extinction is 2020, said "I wouldn’t accept it,” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), adding, “I don’t trust Russians." Mike Siegel, the progressive Democrat who nearly defeated McCaul in 2018-- with no help from the DCCC-- is going to finish the job next year. He noted that "McCaul's refusal to criticize the President, even when Trump flouts the rule of law and undermines the foundations of our democracy, is unfortunately par for the course. If McCaul and his Republican buddies would use their power to keep the President in line-- instead of occasionally distancing themselves through ineffectual comments-- we would not be in the position we are in now. Instead, we have an out-of-control President, openly courting foreign interference in our elections. Again."George Conway and Neal Katyal teamed up for a full-fledged editorial at the Washington Post, Trump Just Invited Congress To Begin Impeachment Proceedings.
On Tuesday, Trump gave us direct evidence of his contempt toward the most foundational precept of our democracy-- that no person, not even the president, is above the law. He filed a brief in the nation’s second-most-important court that takes the position that Congress cannot investigate the president, except possibly in impeachment proceedings. It’s a spectacularly anti-constitutional brief, and anyone who harbors such attitudes toward our Constitution’s architecture is not fit for office. Trump’s brief is nothing if not an invitation to commencing impeachment proceedings that, for reasons set out in the Mueller report, should have already commenced.The case involves a House committee’s efforts to follow up on the testimony of Trump’s now-incarcerated former attorney, Michael Cohen, that Trump had allegedly committed financial and tax fraud, and allegedly paid off paramours in violation of campaign finance laws. The House Committee on Oversight and Reform subpoenaed Trump’s accountants in mid-April for relevant documents, and Trump tried to block the move, only to be sternly rebuked in mid-May by a federal judge in Washington.The appeals brief filed Monday by Trump attacks that decision. But to describe Trump’s brief is to refute it. He argues that Congress is “trying to prove that the President broke the law” and that that’s something Congress can’t do, because it’s “an exercise of law enforcement authority that the Constitution reserves to the executive branch.”But in fact, Congress investigates lawbreaking, and potential lawbreaking, all the time. Mobsters, fraudsters, government employees, small companies, big companies-- like it or not, all types of people and businesses get subpoenaed from time to time so that Congress can figure out whether current laws are effective, whether new laws are needed, whether sufficient governmental resources are being devoted to the task, whether more disclosure to the government or the public is required, or greater penalties, and so on.To this, Trump’s brief complains that “Congress could always make this (non-falsifiable) argument” to justify any investigation. But that’s simply the result of the fact that, as the district court explained, Congress’s “power to investigate is deeply rooted in the nation’s history.” Congress, relying on English parliamentary tradition, has performed this function since the founding.To accept Trump’s argument to the contrary-- to say Congress can’t look into matters that might involve crimes-- would in many cases gut Congress’s ability to gain information it needs to legislate. And perversely, in Trump’s case, it makes a virtue of the fact that he has been accused of committing crimes.Which brings us to the main point: England’s King George III was above the law, but the founders of our republic wanted a system that would divide power and have the branches check one another. The idea that only the president can investigate the president is an argument for autocrats, not Americans.Trump says “trust me,” but that was exactly the argument the founders rebelled against. They knew that public officials would not always be angels, and that power had to be checked and dispersed. As James Madison put it in Federalist No. 51, “It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.”The only redeeming quality of Trump’s legal brief is its seeming, grudging acknowledgment that Congress’s powers might be greater in an impeachment proceeding. That has things only half-right. Yes, Congress could investigate Trump’s finances in an impeachment proceeding, but it can do so without launching the formal process of impeachment.That said, Trump’s brief can be construed as an invitation to commence impeachment proceedings. In those proceedings, Trump’s attitudes toward our Constitution’s checks and balances, in addition to evidence of obstruction of justice, must play a key role. Indeed, the third article of impeachment against President Richard M. Nixon, adopted by the House Judiciary Committee in 1974, charged him with defying lawful subpoenas issued by the House Judiciary Committee.Not only has Trump done that, but he has also demonized judges who disagree with him and insulted the press (despite its constitutional status) for calling him to account. Other leaders around the world may behave this way, but these are not proper actions of a president of the United States. What makes the United States exceptional is its commitment to its constitutional architecture, particularly divided powers.For the past three decades, many constitutional law classes have begun with Nixon’s breathtaking statement to David Frost in May 1977: “Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Generations of students have gasped, shocked that a former president could say such a thing. This time, it’s not a former president but a sitting one. Every principle behind the rule of law requires the commencement of a process now to make this president a former one.
As the morning crew at Politico pointed out, Trump handed those who want to impeach him a gift. "far be it for us to divine why the president said this," they wrote, "and what exactly is going through his head. But the people we spoke to Wednesday night said it is rooted in a win-at-any-and-all-costs mentality -- a life-is-complicated vibe that tries to paint everyone else as rubes, and yet ignores the guts of American law. Furthermore, it reflects his thinking that he hates the idea the 2016 election was stolen from him, so he tries to rationalize the very things he and his campaign stand accused of doing. In our time covering Congress-- going back a decade-- we’ve never heard anyone ever even privately say they would accept foreign assistance in an election. Ever. And a lot of members have said crazy stuff to us privately!... If you are a Republican or a Democrat and you'd like to defend the president here, drop us a line. OK... how about a floor objection from Trump puppet Marsha Blackburn?Pelosi's comment was some bullshit about what a bad boy Trump is but said Democrats are "no closer" to impeaching him. At Bloomberg News, Jonathan Bernstein wrote that Trump's Awful Comments Need a Real Response. He wants Republicans to take a stand, reminding his readers that Senor Trumpanzee supplied "a helpful reminder on Wednesday that he’s entirely unfit for the office he holds by once again welcoming foreign interference in U.S. elections... How bad is all this? Most of the comments I’ve seen condemning Trump’s remarks-- none, I should note, from Republicans in Congress, although perhaps I missed some-- treat it as grievous misbehavior for a political candidate. True enough. But it’s considerably worse coming from a sitting president. Trump’s obligations in office extend far beyond following campaign laws. He’s the country’s commander in chief and top diplomat, and as such responsible for making clear to all foreign nations and other groups that messing with the internal affairs of the United States will have serious consequences. Instead, he’s basically inviting everyone in."
As the political scientist Jennifer Victor says: “Democracy happens when people use a legitimate process to select leaders from among its citizens. If people from another country influence the selection of leaders, the sovereignty of the democracy is eroded. If foreigners affect an election, the results are comprised.” The flip side is that the U.S. government is supposed to conduct foreign policy on behalf of the nation, not on behalf of the personal interests-- political and private-- of the president.So what should happen now?For one thing, it would be helpful for Wray to speak up and explain why Trump is wrong. If he doesn’t do so on his own, perhaps the House Judiciary Committee could invite him to explain it to them. This would be an appropriate time, too, for former President George W. Bush to say something. (Whatever one thinks of Bush’s terms in office, it’s hard to imagine him inviting a foreign nation to disrupt our elections.) The same for any former FBI directors, secretaries of defense and state, and other heavyweights, especially Republicans.But we all know the truth: This is really on the current Republicans who could do something about it. That includes the people at Fox News and other Republican-aligned media, who don’t actually have to pretend that encouraging foreign nations to influence U.S. elections is exemplary behavior for a president. And it includes Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other congressional Republicans, who have the ability to put an end to this if they want. As long as they’re all willing to join Trump in this kind of despicable behavior, there’s no reason to expect him to stop.
Notice, in the video, how agitated Trump got at the mention of the FBI chief-- the one he hand-picked as head of the FBI? According to reporting from Darren Samuelsohn and Natasha Bertrand yesterday, Trump's willingness to accept foreign assistance has essentially invited overseas spies to meddle with 2020 presidential campaigns, undoing months of work. They wrote that "Nearly two years ago, FBI Director Chris Wray set up an office tasked solely with stopping the type of Russian interference efforts that infected the 2016 campaign. On Wednesday night, President Donald Trump undercut the whole operation in a matter of seconds... America’s enemies will see Trump’s comments and likely 'come out of the woodwork like never before to try to influence the president,' said longtime FBI veteran Frank Figliuzzi, who served as the bureau’s assistant director for counterintelligence until 2012. 'And it’s going to be more difficult to defend against because they’ll try harder than ever to mask their attempts.'"
