Covering Up The Cover-Up by Nancy OhanianIt was only a matter of time. How long was it going to take before a majority of Americans understood that for the sake of our country, Trump needs to be impeached? It happened relatively quickly, faster than I thought it would (if not should). As Dan Balz and Scott Clement pointed out for Washington Post readers the majority already backs the impeachment inquiry and a Schar School poll shows that a plurality say he should be removed from office. It's especially bad news for Republicans that 57% of independent voters support for the impeachment inquiry, with 49% already saying the House should vote to remove Trump. Since a July poll by The Post and ABC, there has been movement toward an impeachment inquiry across the political map, "with support for the inquiry rising by 25 points among Democrats, 21 points among Republicans and 20 points among independents."
Previous Post-Schar School or Post-ABC News polls taken at different points throughout this year found majorities of Americans opposing the start of an impeachment proceeding, with 37 percent to 41 percent saying they favored such a step. The recent revelations appear to have prompted many Americans to rethink their position.The poll finds that, by a margin of 58 percent to 38 percent, Americans say the House was correct to undertake the inquiry. Among all adults, 49 percent say the House should take the more significant step to impeach the president and call for his removal from office. Another 6 percent say they back the start of the inquiry but do not favor removing Trump from office, with the remainder undecided about the president’s ultimate fate. The results among registered voters are almost identical....The impeachment inquiry is moving forward at a steady pace, with House committees issuing more subpoenas on Monday and with additional testimony from witnesses likely later this week. The president, meanwhile, has denounced the Democrats for undertaking the inquiry, and his reelection campaign has begun airing television ads echoing charges, largely unfounded, that the president has made in tweets and statements....At this early stage in the impeachment inquiry, whose timing is fraught as the country barrels toward an election year, the public is siding more with congressional Democrats than Republicans when it comes to their responses so far. By a margin of 49 percent to 44 percent, Americans narrowly approve of the way congressional Democrats are responding to the inquiry. But by a margin of 56 percent to 33 percent, they say they disapprove of the way congressional Republicans are responding. The latter tally includes more than one-third of Republicans who disapprove of how their party’s congressional representatives are dealing with this.Majorities of Americans say Democrats in Congress are making a necessary stand against Trump’s actions (61 percent) and are acting to uphold their constitutional duties (53 percent). Similarly, a majority (55 percent) say Democrats are not overreacting by starting the impeachment inquiry. However, in a potential warning sign to Democrats, 50 percent of Americans say that the impeachment proceeding is distracting Congress from more important issues, slightly higher than the percent who disagree (46 percent).The survey finds cracks within the Republican coalition on the question of support for the impeachment inquiry, with younger and more moderate Republicans offering greater support. Overall, 25 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents support the impeachment inquiry. Broken down by ideology, 41 percent of moderate-to-liberal Republicans say they favor the inquiry, compared with 16 percent of conservatives, who make up the majority of the party.Broken down by age groups, 40 percent of Republican-leaning adults ages 18-39 endorse the start of the impeachment inquiry, compared with 23 percent of those ages 40-64 and 13 percent of those age 65 and older.On the question of the appropriateness of Trump’s request to Zelensky to investigate Biden and his son, 45 percent of moderate-to-liberal Republicans and Republicans under age 40 say it was not appropriate. Overall, 33 percent of Republican-leaning adults say it was inappropriate.As in many things related to the president, there is a significant gender gap in the findings of the poll, with 65 percent of women favoring the impeachment inquiry, compared with 51 percent of men.A majority (61 percent) of white college graduates favor the inquiry, while whites without college degrees, a mainstay of Trump’s support, are split: 47 percent in favor and 48 percent in opposition. A smaller majority (53 percent) of white college graduates also say the House should recommend that the president be removed from office.
As you know by now, early yesterday, the Trumpist Regime ordered Gordon Sondland, the wealthy GOP donor who bought the EU ambassador post from Trump with a million dollar contribution to the Trump inaugural, money that illegally went right into Trump's pockets, not to testify before Congress. Sondland was the one who told reactionary Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) that there was a quid pro quo for Kiev making up dirt on the Bidens in return for the $400 million in military aid Trump was holding up. He was scheduled to be deposed by three committees at 9:30. Three of the worst of the congressional Trump puppets-- Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Lee Zeldin (R-NY) and Jim Jordan (R-OH)-- defended Trump for his obstruction. Reading the White House talking points, Gaetz said the Intelligence Committee is "This is a kangaroo court and Chairman Schiff is acting like a malicious Captain Kangaroo." Also reading from the official talking points memo, Long Island's worst political joke said that the whole inquiry is a "a political charade [and] a clown show." Gaetz's gerrymandered district is red enough for Gaetz to say anything insane he wants without having to worry about voters firing him. But Zeldin is going to find it very difficult to be reelected next year. Jordan, who also represents a gerrymandered red district is probably safe as well and all he does is yell that everyone has "a right to know who the whistleblower is," exactly the opposite of the law protecting whistleblowers.Sondland's attorney issued a statement claiming that "Sondland had previously agreed to appear voluntarily today, without the need for a subpoena, in order to answer the Committee’s questions on an expedited basis. As the sitting U.S. Ambassador to the EU and employee of the State Department, Ambassador Sondland is required to follow the Department’s direction." The lawyer added that his client is "profoundly disappointed that he will not be able to testify today. Ambassador Sondland believes strongly that he acted at all times in the best interests of the United States, and he stands ready to answer the Committee’s questions fully and truthfully."Schiff, noting that the State Department not only blocked Sondland’s testimony but is also keeping him from turning over texts relevant to the impeachment inquiry, told reporters that the decision to block Sondland’s cooperation is "strong evidence" of obstruction of Congress, obviously another article of impeachment against Trump. "The failure to produce this witness, the failure to produce these documents we consider yet additional strong evidence of obstruction of the constitutional functions of Congress, a coequal branch of government... The president and secretary of state are taking actions that prevent us from getting the facts needed to protect the nation’s security."Jamie Raskin, a constitutional law expert and member of the House Judiciary Committee agrees that this constitutes another article of impeachment. "This is part of the obstructionism of the White House that has been taking place since the beginning of the year. We have a lawless, runaway executive branch of government, and the president has ordered wholesale defiance of the lawful demands of Congress... In a certain sense they are digging their own impeachment pit if they thumb their nose at the people’s representatives."A couple hour later, the three relevant committee chairs-- Schiff, Eliot Engel (For Affairs) and Elijah Cummings (Oversight) issued the following statement:
The House of Representatives is engaged in an impeachment inquiry to determine whether the President violated his oath of office and endangered our national security by pressing Ukraine to launch sham investigations to assist his personal and political interests rather than the interests of the American people. Today, the White House has once again attempted to impede and obstruct the impeachment inquiry.This morning, we learned from Ambassador Sondland’s personal attorneys that the State Department left a voicemail last night at 12:30 a.m. informing them that the Trump Administration would not allow the Ambassador to appear today as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry.In addition, Ambassador Sondland’s attorneys have informed us that the Ambassador has recovered communications from his personal devices that the Committees requested prior to his interview today. He has turned them over to the State Department, however, and the State Department is withholding them from the Committees, in defiance of our subpoena to Secretary Pompeo.These actions appear to be part of the White House’s effort to obstruct the impeachment inquiry and to cover up President Trump’s misconduct from Congress and the American people. Ambassador Sondland’s testimony and documents are vital, and that is precisely why the Administration is now blocking his testimony and withholding his documents.We consider this interference to be obstruction of the impeachment inquiry. We will be issuing subpoena to Ambassador Sondland for both his testimony and documents.
Nunziata was formerly Marco Rubio's counselCNN got into what many Americans are wondering: "If Trump-- and, by extension, his State Department-- are completely certain they were acting appropriately, why keep Sondland from testifying to that effect? If there is truly nothing to hide here and everything that Trump and his people did was 'perfect,' why not let Sondland tell that story?" And worse... when the Trumpist Department of "Justice" argued in court yesterday about not turning over some documents that Congress asked for, their argument was that the judicial decisions that led to Nixon resigning rather than be impeached, were incorrect-- another way of saying that Nixon's impeachment proceedings were illegitimate, which is exactly what they are now saying about Trump's. Can't wait for the Supreme Court to step into this!
