Tag: Impeachment
Guilty as charged
The opening of the trial proceedings in the Senate has already produced an obvious result: the President has no defense against the charge that he tried to use US government aid to gain a personal political advantage over a potential rival, then obstructed Congress in its investigation. White House lawyers are not claiming he didn’t try to extort the Ukrainians to announce an investigation of Joe Biden, only that he was free to do it and to block witnesses and documents the House of Representatives requested.
This amounts to the inverse of nolo contendere, in which a defendant doesn’t admit guilt, but accepts punishment. Trump is admitting the facts, but the Republican-controlled Senate is protecting him from the penalty provided in the Constitution, removal from office. It has the power under the Constitution to do that and is exercising it with vigor, preventing even submission of documentary evidence and witness testimony to the wrongdoing.
The big question is how the country will react to a President who believes he can abuse power as much he wants and suffer no consequence. According to the first poll taken since the articles of impeachment were delivered to the Senate, a thin majority of Americans now believes he should be removed from office, a wider margin believes the charges against him are true, and two-thirds believe the proceedings in the Senate should include testimony from witnesses.
If confirmed, those results would be a substantial deviation from the trend line in recent months, which is basically flat. The partisan divide is still wide and Republicans in the Senate continue to believe that their prospects in the November election are more threatened by Trump-allied challengers in the primaries than by Democrats at the polls. None of the supposed Republican moderates in the Senate have budged from the majority on the many Democratic proposals to bring witnesses and documents into the process.
The Republicans have an option if the going gets rough. They could decide to defenestrate Trump and put Vice President Pence in his place. More genuinely conservative than Trump on social and religious issues, Pence could be relied on to appoint judges who would please the anti-abortion, pro-Christian, Republican base as well as continue the anti-immigration crusade (double meaning intended) Trump has conducted. What Pence lacks is even a rudimentary personality, never mind charisma.
The Democrats are meanwhile still engaged in the fratricidal warfare of the presidential primaries. For now the presidential hopefuls seem mostly incapable of refocusing their attacks on Trump rather than each other. That isn’t good, but the next month or two may well sort out who the candidate will be. If that doesn’t happen, the Democrats could go to the mid-July convention in Milwaukee without a candidate. A “brokered” convention would not be a good thing.
But the biggest single factor in the next election will be the economy. Trump’s bragging at Davos this week was based on falsehoods. The Obama expansion has continued, but growth is now slowing, though not dramatically yet. The Trump tax cut did little to stimulate the economy but a great deal to balloon the government deficit. The trade deal with China failed to correct most of the structural issues that have given the US such a large bilateral deficit. The trade deal with Mexico made desirable updates. Hourly wages have begun to perk up, but inequality continues its long rise.
The picture is worse on the national security front. The fights Trump has picked with North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran have produced no good results for the US. He has nothing to show for his lovefest with Russian President Putin, who still sits on a big piece of Ukraine. The Israel/Palestine peace plan is a bust. The NATO allies despise the President and are holding their breath for him to leave office. He ignores Latin America and Africa (to their benefit more than likely) while talking tough on China but doing precious little.
If there were professor who could judge the Trump Administration on its economic, social, and national security merits, it would get an F. He is not only guilty as charged, but incompetent as well.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 17
– Wired has a great story of the long and winding road US has followed against Huawei.
– DIA has new unclassified report on foreign challenges to US space security.
– A former student sends an article on DOD foreign language needs.
-WaPo reports growing strength of al-Shabaab.
-And there’s bipartisan opposition to US drawdown from Africa.
– Lawfare has a cute history report on the different actions for which other officials than presidents have been impeached.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 16
GAO has ruled that the delay in Ukraine aid was illegal. Here’s a story and the text of the judgment. This is the same procedure Sen.Bentsen and I used to block Sec. Cheney’s effort to kill the V-22 Osprey in 1991.
Politico says the administration does not want the annual state of the world hearing with the heads of the intelligence community to have any unclassified sessions — in order to avoid public contradictions of Trump.
CFR has another of those grand strategies for China relations that looks pretty good; has 22 pretty specific recommendations.
Monkey Cage has a good explainer of the Libya situation.
And here’s how NYT verified the Ukraine airplane video.
I missed this earlier edition:
– WaPo says Trump threatened Europeans with a 25% tariff on autos if they didn’t start the process under the Iran nuclear deal to restore sanctions.
-Iraqi prime minister says US troop presence will be decided by his successor.
– Look what Australia is doing about Huawei and 5G.
– NYT has good list of what’s in and not in new China trade agreement.
– WSJ doubts trade deal will meet its goals.
– New book by WaPo reporters depicts Trump as erratic and ill-informed.
– CFR has a new foreign policy jobs site..
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, December 21 and 22
December 22
– Washington awaits North Korean missile test with policy in disarray, NYT says.
– WSJ says Navarro endures on trade issues.
-Former CIA official reflects on Post’s Afghanistan articles. I agree.
-Newly released emails show OMB blocking Ukraine aid 90 minutes after Zelensky phone call.
– NYT compares political situations of Nixon and Trump.
December 21
– The administration forced Congress to back down on a provision in the omnibus spending bill that would have forced early release of military aid to Ukraine.
– NYT can track you by your phone, and they did it on the president.
-WaPo lists the contenders fighting in Libya.
– NYT says there’s vote rigging in Venezuela..
– The fight over control of the world’s financial system.
– FP explains why US and Israel don’t have a formal alliance.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Legitimacy counts
For only the third time in American history, the House of representatives, voting along partisan lines, impeached a president yesterday. President Trump now faces a trial in the Senate, where virtually all of the Republicans are committed to following Majority Leader McConnell’s lead. He has announced himself not impartial, despite the oath he will be required to swear, and is coordinating with the White House on how to proceed.
The debate yesterday was a bore. If someone said something new, it escaped me. Democrats relied mainly on the facts elicited in public hearings that demonstrated the President
- had used his public office to seek and extort illegal Ukrainian help against a political rival, using his private lawyer as his main agent, and
- obstructed Congress’ efforts to obtain testimony and documents relevant to the proceedings.
The Republicans simply asserted that the above facts had not been demonstrated and criticized the process, claiming that parts of it were conducted in secret (even if Republicans were present in the closed-door hearings) and that no witness had testified to the President’s direct involvement (most of the witnesses who could have done so were prevented by the President). One Republican even claimed that Jesus had been given more rights in his trial by Pontius Pilate. This silliness merits no response.
One Republican claim deserves deeper consideration: that the Democrats are trying to overturn the results of the 2016 election. That is literally untrue, since removal of Trump from office by the Senate would bring Vice President Pence to the Oval Office, not Hillary Clinton. But the Republican claim reflects a real concern: Trump, whose 63 million votes (he actually got less than that) the Republicans repeatedly cited yesterday in the House, lost the popular vote to Clinton, who got close to 66 million votes. Trump won only because of the Electoral College, created in the 18th century to share power between more populated states and less populated ones. It gives a voter in Wyoming something like three times the weight of a voter in California or New York.
Trump is unlikely to do better in the popular vote in 2020. California and New York, which voted 62% and 59% for Clinton, both suffered big losses in the Republican tax cuts of 2017. Trump is loathed in both the first and third most populous states in the country. Texas, which Trump won with 52%, is turning increasingly purple, if not blue. It is hard to picture how Trump will make up in the rest of the country for the tilt to the Democrats–any Democrat–in the next election’s popular vote totals.
But these three populous states are arguably the most disadvantaged in the Electoral College. So it is easy to imagine that Trump might win in the Electoral College with, let us guess, 5 million fewer popular votes than the Democratic candidate.
This is a serious problem with no easy solution. It is serious because power in a republic needs to come from the people and the people need to have equal rights. There is no divine right, or right of less populous states, to choose leaders.
It can’t be fixed easily because amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College would require a 2/3 majority in both Houses of Congress as well as approval in 3/4 (38 out of 50) of the states. The Electoral College’s perverse effect on the popular vote can also be undone by a “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact,” in which the states agree to award their Electoral College votes to the popular vote winner. It would be activated once states with a majority of the electoral votes agree. But that ongoing effort is unlikely to produce results before the 2020 election.
Both Democrats and Republicans know this: Trump did not win the popular vote in 2016 and won’t in 2020. Republicans need to ferociously assert his legitimacy because he lacks the approval of the plurality of voters. Democrats will try in the Senate trial to ensure that he is de-legitimized further.
The trial in the Senate has the potential to make or break Trump. Speaker Pelosi is holding out on formally notifying the Senate of the impeachment until McConnell provides assurance of a serious process, with witnesses, including those prevented from testifying in the House. I don’t really see what leverage she has–the Democratic Senators who are candidates for President will want the trial early in January so they can get back on the campaign trail–but I certainly understand what is at stake. Legitimacy counts.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Impeachment day
The US House of Representatives will impeach President Trump today, or if the debate goes too long maybe tomorrow. The charges are clear: abuse of power and obstructing Congress. The evidence is overwhelming and uncontested: using his personal lawyer, Trump used US government assets to further his personal electoral interests by trying to get Ukraine to investigate a political rival and ordered Administration officials not to cooperate with the impeachment process.
The outcome of the trial in the Senate, where a two-thirds majority is required, is just as clear. Virtually all of the 53 Republicans are so far determined to vote against removing the President from office. It is not even clear that the Senate will permit a serious trial with witnesses. Senate Majority Leader McConnell has announced that he is not impartial, despite Senate rules that require he swear an oath or affirm that
in all things appertaining to the trial of Donald J. Trump, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help me God.
Clearly, McConnell should not be voting on impeachment when it is taken up in the Senate in January, nor should he be deciding what the procedure there will be.
Meanwhile, President Trump has sent what can only be termed a nutty letter to Speaker of the House Pelosi objecting to the impeachment proceedings in stentorian tones. The letter itself could be the basis for an article of impeachment, as it fails to acknowledge the House’s constitutional authority to conduct the impeachment process. It thus confirms that the President is attempting to obstruct Congress in fulfilling its responsibilities.
It is still unclear what the political consequences of this impeachment will be. Those who hoped impeachment would tame Trump have already been proved wrong. But despite the partisan divide, the House has been able to proceed with budget bills containing lots of controversial measures. Those are expected to be approved in the Senate by Friday, when otherwise the US Government will again have to go through the ridiculous process of shutting down.
Both Democrats and Republicans seem concerned that they demonstrate some tangible progress on issues that matter to Americans (family leave, health care, gun research) even while conducting a dialogue of the deaf on impeachment. That is good news on the domestic front, at least for now.
More important is how impeachment, followed by “acquittal” in the Senate, will affect turnout and voting in the November 2020 election, when all of the House, one-third of the Senate, and the White House will be on the ballot. It certainly didn’t help the Democrats when Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998 but not removed from office. But those were different times. So far impeachment has done little to damage Trump’s support with those who approve of his performance as President.
How will impeachment affect the President, especially his foreign policy moves? My best guess is that he will become anxious to show some results even if he does not moderate his language or behavior. He has already reached a truce in the trade war with the Chinese, giving Beijing more than he got. He has also ordered a partial withdrawal from Afghanistan, despite the failure to reach an agreement with the Taliban. He will likely also cave to North Korea, which has turned belligerent towards its erstwhile lover. Trump has nothing to show for his erratic Russophilia and his hostility towards friends, allies, and democracies. Making America Grate Again is not, it turns out, a way to serve the national interest.
But the biggest factor affecting Trump’s electoral prospects is the economy. It is already slowing, and Boeing’s 737 Max problems will slow it further. Watch that space: an end to the longest US expansion ever would imperil Trump more than impeachment.
RSS - Posts
