As long as Mr. Trump can “shoot people on Fifth Avenue “ and get away with it he will continue doing it. There will always be like-minded sycophants to defend him. There is a choice, either stop him or let him continue, whereby one becomes an accomplice.
6
Do it already you whimps! As much as I respect Nancy Pelosi and her political savvy, I think she is miscalculating the damage impeachment would bring -- it will fall far more on Trump than on the Dems. Rally his base? How could it be any more rallied than it already is?
But most important, honor your oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. Trump is attacking the Constitution and the Dems are not protecting it. Impeach him and put the onus on Republicans to explain why they are more loyal to Trump than they are to the Constitution.
8
What's the point of having laws if you are not going to enforce them? Are you suggesting that the President does not need to follow the laws? Impeach already. Let the chips fall where they will. Dems need to stop pretending to court repubs. They will never come back from the dark side.
7
Mr. Bouie is dead on right. This is a situation that calls for bold and agressive action. Trump is basically taking credit for actions that Obama took that have resulted in the economic growth we're seeing. He (along with many others) has correctly identified China as a serious threat but has no clue how to actually go about countering it. And, he is lawless, punitive and petty. He must be impeached.
One man's opinion ........
6
Since so many Democrats who have a 17 majority in the House are demanding a vote on impeachment it has become clear to me that the bean-counting Pelosi has come up empty-handed. Those 30 Democratic Representatives from Trump Country are not on board with her scheme...there is no constitutional crisis but the one within the DNC!
2
Fascinated as I am, as well, with the history of the Civil War and with Mr. Bouie's obvious intellect and pinpoint accuracy regarding the current President, I must disagree that the analogy to Lincoln and McClellan is apt. There, Lincoln bears as much culpability as does his general. After all, Lincoln was the Commander in Chief. All he needed to do was order McClellan to act or remove him sooner than he did. The House cannot remove Trump on its own, and Trump cannot order the House or the entire Congress to do anything. Speaker Pelosi's legitimate concerns are political and tactical in nature. For those of us who watched the excruciatingly slow pace of the Watergate hearings and the more recent impeachment proceedings against Clinton, it is apparent that if the House votes for impeachment the effort will die a slow and timely death in the Senate. Meanwhile, the Democrats would be delivering to the President the gift that he craves: all news about Trump all the time -- 24/7. This may be terrific for his followers, but it will confound and infuriate those who oppose him. The best approach is to leave Trump where he is -- flailing about in an increasingly dysfunctional White House, not getting much done, following paths that will scare the pants off most Americans, and leaving him exposed in October 2020 as the inept pretender he is for all to see. The Democrats should focus intently and incessantly at beating Trump at the ballot box by a margin that the President cannot deny.
90
@Benjamin Gilbert
I must take issue with your assessment that all Lincoln had to do was to fire McClellan. At that point in the war the Union had a dearth of proven general officers capable of high command, and McClellan's men were fiercely loyal to him. Lincoln discussed firing Mac with his top advisers. When they counseled that Lincoln should replace Mac "with anybody", Lincoln said he couldn't appoint "anybody", he had to appoint "somebody"; who was that to be? His advisers came up empty.
Lincoln replaced McClellan twice, with failed generals in the interval. Eventually, Grant was the answer.
17
@Benjamin Gilbert
Democrats also are "flailing about". This weakness can be fatal in stopping a President whose support actually is remarkably high.
5
@Benjamin Gilbert
Leaving the Stable Genius in office unimpeached also runs a huge risk. This sorry excuse for a human being may well trump up a war to retain power. With the state of things now, it wouldn't take much.
Perhaps impeachment proceedings would hinder his ability to start a war.
19
Impeachment allows the Democrats more access to witnesses and information. What is the downside? That the Senate will not convict. But the corruption and criminality that will be discovered is necessary to unearth otherwise the country cannot function as some sort of democracy or representative republic. Also, the corruption and felonies discovered may change the independents to swing en masse to the Democrats. Plus, it helps stop Barr from quashing ongoing investigations started by Mueller.
87
@David Jacobson I see no reason not to have a long engagement and delay the marriage. Begin investigating, using impeachment discovery to uncover all the evidence that is being blocked, such that the actual vote to impeach comes after long months of televised hearings. And begin with fining and jailing the stone wallers.
13
@Chip
The Senate majority leader will never agree to hearings, and will block impeachment from consideration. Whatever excuse he throws out, he can't afford to risk having hearings in an election year. Pelosi's task is to so arrange things that McConnell loses either way. This is tough, but she's as smart a political tactician as anyone currently living, and not ashamed to ask for help. If anyone can do it, she's the one.
3
House initiated impeachment is a waste of time when money, Fox, and McConnell control the senate - in equal measures. The real focus of the Democrats should be on Kentucky. Dispose of McConnell like McClellan and the war will turn.
74
@swbv. Just what I have been thinking. Dems should flood Kentucky with money to elect a dem.
3
@swbv Mitch McConnell would love your comment. He wants all hate to be directed at him personally, to shield the rest of his caucus. If other Republican senators didn't approve of what Mitch was doing, he'd be deposed as Senate Majority leader. But they so obviously do support what he is doing, because they are all bought, paid for, and under threat of primary, financed by Kochs and others, from the right if they put so much as a toe out of line.
The entire Republican caucus is compromised. Don't blame Mitch, there's 52 other people under his umbrella that would do the same.
3
A political campaign cannot be compared to a military campaign. Wars are won through superior intelligence, armaments, and overwhelming forces. Political campaigns are waged through intelligence, social media, and propaganda.
Political campaigns are much more complex today because of the interlocking nature of the global economy and the rise of ethnic populism. To wit: Viktor Orban being lauded by the President in the White House. This scenario would never have materialized under Obama.
Trump’s administration functions as a veritable fifth column, in cahoots with white nationalists in Europe and elsewhere.
It is stunning, but we have to grapple with the image of a US administration being propped up and manipulated by a so-called hostile power and a puppeteer named Putin.
Is Nancy Pelosi reluctant to impeach because of inertia or because of political savvy?
Beware of getting down into the muck and wrestling with a pig. Because a pig likes to get dirty.
3
I am reading the comments, mostly by liberals, as a call to fight. I am 62 and don't recall seeing this before, but it fits the times we are in. Vietnam was divisive; it was bad policy which sent too many to die in a war which brought us nothing good. Now we have a lawless president who must be brought down. Many think he's a saint because the economy is doing well. Many think he is vile and destructive. He is doing what he can to destroy the norms which support the rule of law. It is apparent he intends to rule so he can evade accountability for his past and present actions. If the outcry is sufficient, if enough people raise their voices, he will be impeached. Whether or not he is removed will be irrelevant. What is most important is that the investigations which accompany an impeachment proceeding have more legal weight. I have been reluctant to raise my voice, but not now. Clinton was impeached for so much less.
481
@rdb1957 You are absolutely correct. I'm under no illusion that impeachment would lead to removal, but for the sake of the future of this country, we have to take a stand for the constitution and for the rule of law. History shows that a primary reason that countries fall into autocracy is because the opposition did nothing to stop such a slide. It may sound like hyperbole, but we are living through such a moment. Future generations will judge us on what we did to fight for our democracy.
59
@rdb1957 - Impeachment is a sideshow and distraction so that the progressive agenda gets no media play. Don't you know that? Nobody cares about impeaching Trump, they care about healthcare, education, and the environment, plus ending the Forever War that neocons & neolibs operate to take our attention off of our real issues.
11
The House needs to drive additional stakes in the ground: on health care, by fortifying the ACA and adding a Medicare option or public option; climate change, infrastructure, college education financing, comprehensive immigration reform and other policy areas. Even though none of these things are likely to move in the GOP Senate, they’ll lay the groundwork for 2020, for both the Presidential and Congressional elections.
And yes, the House DOES need to continue its investigation into Russia and related Trump wrongdoing. The seminal event will be Robert Mueller’s answers to Democratic Representatives’ questions being televised in snippets on nightly news and other shows. This could be followed by also bringing Don McGahn and others in to answer questions.
Once the poll results favoring impeachment get into the low to mid 60s, the time will then be ripe to draft articles of impeachment. This, coupled with the House policy proposals, has strong potential to push both Donald Trump and Republican Senators in swing states far back on their heels.
13
Trump is the master of seizing the initiative and will lie, cheat and steal to keep. Now is the time for investigations and hearings. The House Democrats don't even need to vote on it until after the election. They need to put Trump on his heels every single day.
The feeble prosecution of the Civil War before Grant took over is a rich and correct analogy: we are fighting the Confederacy and it's hateful legacy to this very day.
250
@L Burr Pelosi to her enduring credit is trying to keep everyone's eye on the ball. But leftist zealots are determined to drive the party straight off the cliff. They're completely oblivious to the consequences of their proposed actions. Impeaching Trump will facilitate his winning a 2nd term. The Democrats were given a House majority to craft & pass good legislation. Impeachment hearings driven by Progressive fanatics will certainly over-reach. It will be easily spun by Trump as a witch hunt to fair-minded voters. Going down this path will keep the issue in the forefront for the 2020 election. When impeachment fails in the Senate, Trump will again claim victory. The pure efficiency that Democrats are able to deploy when it comes to shooting themselves in the foot is often breathtaking. This is the one time we should resist the temptation to pull the trigger. The GOP Representative in my district was replaced by a Democrat who promised to fix healthcare, address immigration reform, implement a more equitable tax system. I suspect this is why Democrats won 40 seats in the House. At no time during the campaign were we told all the promises being made would be ditched in a fruitless attempt to impeach Trump. If the 40 Democratic Representatives come back home having accomplished nothing in their two year term they will face a lot of angry constituents. Our Representatives need to at least attempt to fulfill the promises they made to us or face the consequences.
15
@Bill Brown
Bill, you are so accurate in your analysis.
5
@Bill Brown
The Democrats have been passing legislation. They need to impeach as well. Someone has to defend the Constitution and the rule of law, which aren't just issues for "progressive fanatics," but for a number of genuine conservatives as well.
26
The Democrats appear to be acolytes of Fabius Maximus, the Roman general who retreated his way to victory.
As the "strong economy" becomes Trump's latest victim in the eternal war between reality and his statements, I see the Democrats in Congress as the Queens neighborhood folk who ignored cries for help as Kitty Genovese was murdered. Meanwhile, we seem to be heading for a hot war with Iran or Venezuela--or both. John Bolton might be dead wrong about nearly everything, but he does not lack confidence in his antebellum worldview--he will bombard Charleston harbor and let loose the Merrimack as the Copperheads cheer.
As McClellan demonstrated, being in the right means little when one lacks a spine. It might be time for Dems to line up behind someone who has one--Elizabeth Warren.
2
Boule makes the assumption that not only Trump's base, but all Republicans will vote for him. It may be an erroneous assumption. Pelosi is right insisting that a knee jerk impeachment reaction could backfire. Let Trump continue to dig his own grave and face the music after the 2020 election.
Even if Trump was successfully impeached and found guilty by the Senate, he would be replaced by Pence or another Republican contender for the presidency. Republicans may like this scenario too.
Pelosi understands the repercussions of congressional actions. Let her play her hand as she sees fit.
I was initially for waiting to vote Trump out. I'm over that. Time to impeach. His arrogance and stupidity seems to know no bounds and like other dictators sees enemies to be Destroyed everywhere.
3
The election has nothing to do with the Democrats nor the Republicans except the primaries...the Independent voter gets the real choice between the two...they are a fickle bunch but 33 per cent strong leaning towards their pocketbooks.
As long as the swing voter stands against impeachment and remains satisfied with their pay increases and retirement stock growth and their tax cuts there is really nothing Pelosi and the NYT can do about it except continue screaming “constitutional crisis”, treason” and “crumbs” while Biden gaffes that China is not competition.
3
Schoolyard Bullies 101:
1. Stand still and get bullied and harmed.
2. Walk away or run away.
3. Punch the bully to the ground and beat him to a pulp in front of the entire school.
Only #3 is a permanent solution.
Lets Roll.
J Cpt US Army MSC 68-74.
WE died for the Oath to the Constitution.
Congress can at least inquire and vote. It ain't live fire ..
5
Nancy Pelosi are you listening?
1
Yawn. The cries of the desperate grow louder with each tic down in the unemployment rate, with each mumbled frothing of the mullahs, with each hollow threat of the Chinese and with any comparison to the sclerotic socialist euro-paradises. Every headline about the made-lawless-by-liberals southern border adds another 10,000 Trump voters. You are toast because your bakers are incompetent. Liberals can vote for President-to-be Haley in 2024 after the second term. Or, they can emigrate.
3
I agree Mr. Bouie.
Keeping Trump overwhelmed and under seige is the surest method of minimizing the damage he does.
Try not to let him and his sycophants destroy the rule of law either. Ignoring a congressional subpoena is not an option for anyone.
If anyone refuses to show up, have US Marshals walk them in wearing chains and handcuffs. The rule of law must prevail.
What people say before Congress must be the truth, or they can plead the 5th, their choice, showing up is not a choice.
Lawyers who ignore a subpoena or who recommend ignoring a subpoena should be disbarred.
Trump is a lawless tyrant, he must not be allowed to destroy America's government checks and balances.
3
the author states"Impeachment is so rare in American history that it’s difficult to draw broad conclusions about its political impact, but congressional investigations are common and there’s no evidence of this backlash effect."
perhaps he should examine the political after-effects of the Clinton impeachment. Newt Gingrich went home to Georgia and the GOP lost the House and the Senate. Pelosi and other wise Democrats are correct. Get rid of Trump via the ballot box, otherwise he will be a martyr and he and his kind will NEVER go away.
1
Very persuasive essay - I concur that the Dems are holding better cards than they let on. I think the Speaker needs to bang the drum ceaselessly on three points:
1. The investigative actions undertaken by the House are legitimate. Team Mueller laid bare the extent of Russian shenanigans in 2016, and we need to know if and how the President is compromised in his capacity to deal with this, looking ahead to 2020.
2. Impeachment is a last resort, but not off the table. At some point, stonewalling on the part of the executive branch forces the issue.
3. Impeaching Trump is not about removing him from office - it is about forcing facts into the light of day.
Bottom line: This is a national security issue.
3
This is a false analogy. Democrats are not at War with the president. Democrats have accurately assessed the stance that the Republicans would take in an Impeachment process.
Democrats should proceed with constructive action to help citizens of the United States.
@TME
No constructive action can occur as the republicans will not allow anything the democrats do to go further than the House of Representatives. The republicans haven't worked for the People for the entire 40+ years I've been voting. They have been trying to create their Permanent Majority (called a dictatorship under normal circumstances) for 60 or so years.
3
The confederates did not actually win the Civil War. It's important to keep that in mind.
Pelosi is calmly and carefully going through some motions prior to impeachment that are helping her gain momentum. Were she to immediately come in as House speaker screeching about impeachment, Republican politicians could easily use that to sway their base, since most of Trump's voters, even the females, are already not respectful of women.
She'll pull the pin when it's time to pull the pin, and she'll do it calmly and meticulously.
3
As Mr. Bouie says, Democrats must act. But as the House can't both impeach and convict Donald Trump, it would do better to act through assertive investigations and lawsuits against obstruction. Let the voters see the information (and it's clear that there's lots that hasn't yet been revealed) that will prove why they need to elect someone other than Donald Trump in 2020.
We will be in terra incognita if the House begins impeachment proceedings that give it a stronger basis to subpoena documents and witnesses. Looking to the past at the Clinton impeachment may be misplaced since any tacit cooperation with Russia and obstruction of justice are more serious and fundamental than Clinton's perjury as to his affair with Monica Lewinsky. What will be disclosed, how courts will rule on the timing, what the news coverage from different media outlets will be, and how much attention people in different Congressional Districts and States will give and how they will react (and how fluid all these will be) can't really be predicted right now.
The events during the Civil War are far from a rational analogy for what we face today. It's true that General George McClellan was too reluctant to aggressively attack even with prodding from President Lincoln.
Extrapolating from those conditions to today's is seriously flawed. The autocratic right, which now controls most of the levels of power at the federal level and is gaining more at the state levels, would welcome the Dems falling into the trap of impeachment hearings.
First, Trump would certainly not be impeached by the Senate. Secondly, it would provide Trump's Republican party with the fuel they need for four more years, which would seal the fate of this country's "rule of law",and third it would get Trump and his minions off the hook for all of the crimes for which they have yet to be prosecuted.
Nancy Pelosi understands exactly how to counter-punch- she is showing great patience; allows her more impatient caucus member to feint, and avoids a rope-a-dope defense because all the power is with Trump and the spineless Republicans. Play the long game. In that way we can win the bout on points, which is much better than getting kayoed.
3
I am not a student of the Civil War, but as a native Southerner I have absorbed some of its lessons during my lifetime. One such lesson is that the cultural divide that existed between North and South, Union and Confederacy, did not end with the shooting war. It turned into a form of entrenched political warfare that survived Reconstruction and continues to this day under the guise of "conservative" vs. "liberal." I, too, wish for resolution through decisive action, but that would likely end in a lost cause, with the US Senate standing firmly against impeachment. Moreover, the problem goes beyond Trump. Over the last 40 years or so, the GOP has gained dominance by hollowing out the customs, traditions and institutions of democracy. Today, we have not only a lawless President but executive agencies, including a Justice Department, actively engaged in partisan politics and an activist Supreme Court bent on taking us back in time to the Guilded Age. Impeachment proceedings in the House would exhaust a lot of political energy and set the Democrats up for almost certain failure in the Senate, like the former heavyweight boxing champion George Forman wasting his superior strength in hopes of a elusive knockout punch against his challenger Muhmmed Ali. "Rope-a-dope" is what Ali called his strategy. The arc of history is long and the struggle for justice never-ending. Democrats must unite in sustained political action to defeat GOP rule and restore justice to America.
1
I don’t understand the analogy to Johnson’s impeachment as Congress clearly overstepped it’s authority by passing the Tenure of Office Act. As far as Congress is concerned, priority #1 is getting re-elected. Going after the President is not a high priority for many people, but better healthcare, means tested daycare, affordable college tuition and drugs, and the environment are. It is easy for columnists to write about this, but it is misleading to think this is a high priority for working class people.
1
Impeachment is a Ned Stark move, and with the Fox “News” propaganda machine obfuscating the corruption of the entire GOP, impunity will reign as long as the Lannister’s did.
1
Compared to today's insipid, tokenist and incurably craven Democratic Party leadership, McClellan was a paragon of action, effectiveness and courage.
3
If our factions are truly at war, we are sunk.
1
The Trump administration is so corrupt and all the Senate, government agencies and departments around Trump have been corrupted. Trump also has the benefit of Fox News which is state TV, his own personal propaganda network. The Democrats would have a very difficult time penetrating the fortress of lies, lawlessness and corruption that protects this President. The people need to impeach Trump at the ballot box and if the Democrats play this right it can work in their favor. Paint the entire Republican Party for what it is, they are not a victim of Trump they are the Doctor Frankenstein who created Trump, he is just their pitch man, if you want to get rid of this vulgar plague that has infected our government, get rid of the whole lot of them. The Democrats need to show they are doing everything they can without cutting their own throats and show they cannot do it alone, they need the help of the American people to rid the country of a corrupt Republican Party and all of its enablers. The fear of four more years of what we have experienced for the last two and a half years should be enough motivation for anyone with common sense to join the fight for democracy.
3
Exactly. Pelosi is a backroom dealmaker, not a fighter. On top of that she's old and outdated.She's the worst person for this moment in history. And I dont say that as a trumpian troll but as a longtime democratic socialist. Churchill once said that americans make the right decisions - after trying all the wrong decisions. So far you people are still standing around picking and choosing the wrong decisions. After two years of this it might be the time to actually start, you know, doing something about this mess.
1
Thank you! About as timely and relevant as you can get. Who'd have thought we'd be looking back admiringly at House Speaker Carl Albert, circa 1973? Despite his mild/unassuming political persona, he was playing for keeps. Speaker Pelosi isn't. Compare Pelosi's passivity to Albert who set the stage for impeachment & came close to becoming President: "Speaker Albert Was Ready to Be President": https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1982/11/28/speaker-albert-was-ready-to-be-president/84ebaa61-9cf1-4817-836e-a993e7e0e980/?utm_term=.8bb86998a37f
2
The Republicans,icans should impeach Trump.
The President has violated no laws and has been attacked unjustly of colluding with Russia, now proven false. There are no apologies from the Democrats for their false charges. Impeach if you wish, but there is no justification, even if your “never Trump” hatred makes you feel justified.
1
So who will be Grant among current Democrats that replaces the cautious, nay cowardly McClellan stance of the Party? Will Democrats ever see the treasonous Republicans for who they are? They've brought a letter opener to a gun fight while Republicans every day bring the republic closer to a confederacy of dunces and oligarchs.
2
The real parallel is with Clinton, who became much more popular after the Senate failed to convict him after the House impeached him. That's why Trump is goading Democrats to impeach him.
1
Our president is lawless. He has considered himself above the law for decades in his previous life as a con man, liar and outlier to moral values. In this case, impeachment is the only tool which our Congress can use to remove and replace Donald Trump from his imperial hegemony over America.
The Democrats have the upper hand today, but are afraid to press for impeachment, for fear that Trump will be reelected next year. President Abraham Lincoln wrote to his Union commanding general in 1862 about acting NOW and not delaying because of weak Confederate defenses was true. The General refused to act. The Confederacy won at Manassas, Virginia. The Civil War continued for another 3 years.
Jamelle Bouie, thank you for showing us the parallel between Gen. George McClellan, Lincoln's commanding general of the Union Army, discovering that the Confederate forces defending Manassas were "a sham", and today's Congressional delaying of impeachment for fear that Trump will be reelected next year. The North overestimated Confederate strength. Congress is overestimating Trump's strength today.
Trump's forces -- his loyalists -- are gaining strength now as the Democratic Congress delays and shilly-shallies about impeachment. The tide of luck on Democracy's side will never be higher than it is today. Wall Street is tanking, and dictatorial pals of Trump (Victor Orban, Xi-Jinping, Kim Jong-un, Duterte, Maduro, etc) are in the ascendant in their countries. Impeach Trump now.
As a Canadian; it has both fascinated and made me shake my head over the historical mistakes made by the Union forces in the Civil War and even worse the mistakes made during your so called Reconstruction period. It has haunted your country for over 150 years now; and still you do not fully grasp how until as recently as the 1960`s one could argue the North won the war and lost the peace. During the war the North had 4 times the manpower the South had. Lee realized from the beginning there was zero chance they could militarily defeat the Union with it`s massive advantage in men and industrial might. Lee was the Vietcong of his era; fighting guerilla warfare brilliantly in the hope of frustrating the North into deciding to not bother and simply let the South go to avoid needless bloodshed and resources. Until Gettysburg and the mad dream of destroying the army of the Potomic; Lee was succeeding in fighting the superior forces of the North to a standstill; due to incompetent Union generals. They never pressed the advantages they clearly had. The Democrats; having decisively winning the House of Congress keep flinching when push comes to shove. The clear majority of the American public is with them; but they lack the courage to act. Trump is defying the Constitution at every turn; defying the Dems. to fight. There is simply no excuse to not do what they were elected to do. Stand up to Donald Trump once and for all; if they are not cowards?!
I think Trump has to go. But I think a failed impeachment procedure would be worse for this country than not impeaching him at all but RATHER getting rid of him by the voters soundly trouncing him ( I hope) in the 2020 election, which, after all, is a little more than a year away.
How much time would an impeachment procedure actually save over waiting for elections? Impeachments don’t happen overnight. All government moves with frustrating “deliberate speed.” We’d save a few months at most.
If this was Trump’s first year in office, I’d say we can’t wait for another election. But this far along, I think an unquestionable defeat at the ballot box by the voters (electoral college calamity notwithstanding) would be a greater repudiation of Trump and his ilk than an endlessly spun political argument among politicians that will only serve to divide the country even more than it is today!
Kick him out the old fashioned way. At the ballot box. Should Trump win...then I say this country deserves all it gets!!
1
We are about to find out what happens when you throw a tripartite democratic republic and the Executive Branch doesn't show up for the party.
1
If you think our current situation is difficult, I encourage you to take a walk through Arlington National Cemetery. About 16,000 Civil War dead are interred there. Arguably, we are still fighting the Civil War through efforts to disenfranchise our black and brown citizens and through systematic racism.
There is never a wrong time to make the right decision. For our time, impeachment is the right decision. Doing less allows continued normalization of the greed, corruption and destruction of our democracy (and possibly the planet itself) in the name of The Donald.
I will take my marching orders from the likes of Ulysses Grant and George Patton:
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week." - Patton
"No other terms than unconditional and immediate surrender. I propose to move immediately upon your works." - Grant, on his siege of Vicksburg.
I may fail in my attempt to end Trump and lose money and time, but in not acting, I risk my immortal soul.
The utter fecklessness of "leaders" of the Democratic Party should surprise me, but it doesn't.
As has been noted elsewhere, Trump's base and Republicans generally will vote for him again, no matter what transpires between now and the next election, so igniting his base or not is a nonstarter.
Trump revels in breaking norms; Democratic leadership should take this opportunity to remind this life-long criminal that Congressional oversight is a lawful norm that cannot-and will not-be subject to his Bizarro World mindset; this is not a corrupt New York real estate game, where Trump cut his teeth.
What will Democratic leadership do if Trump wins a second term, without undertaking impeachment procedures? You think he's lawless, now?
How about igniting your base, Democrats?
Give those of us disaffected the reason to show up at the polls.
"Trump’s move to refuse all oversight is arguably tantamount to rejecting Congress’s coequal status..."
The Chicken Little School of Journalism seems to be running at full tilt.
The Democratic Party is the party of McClellan. That’s why it should cede it’s leadership to AOC and the Democratic Socialists.
1
@James Wright
Agreed and thanks.
If Democrats have the upper hand as asserted here - namely leading at the polls for 2020 - then why change the odds by impeaching, which can only fail (GOP Senate will NEVER convict) and which might risk giving him a 'sympathy' vote?
(Some of us understand than if he does actually lose in 2020, he and his GOP collaborators will claim fraud and he will not leave office. It's already game over, as many of us see it, Hope I'm wrong).
1
The Mueller investigation did not provide sufficient grounds to impeach Trump, so at this point there is no chance that the Senate would remove Trump from office. But Democrats are itching to do impeach Trump anyway. To middle-of-the-roaders such as myself, it looks (tastes?) like sour grapes.
If Democrats proceed with impeachment and then cannot produce evidence that is convincing to the voters, then the Democrats will lose credibility, which would in turn cost them at the polls in 2020. Democrats would be better served to make news with issues that matter to mainstream Americans.
Ultimately it will be up to the citizens to hold Trump accountable. Have some faith in the voters.
4
@Fred Dorbsky
"Have some faith in the voters..."
...who elected Trump in the first place? Voters are the last people I would trust with my life.
1
Sorry but I think that you're misinformed. The Mueller report suggested (arguably in strong terms) that there MIGHT be grounds for impeachment by the House. The Mueller investigation was also concerned with criminal indictment whose standards and legal bases are different from impeachment. (ie the DOJ view is that the President can't be indicted but can be impeached). Of course the $64,000 political question is whether impeachment proceedings will lead to greater disclosure about loose coordination with Russia and obstruction of justice. (The timing will depend on the courts). And whether news coverage of those disclosures will get the attention (and change the minds) of middle of the roaders like yourself.
1
This is truly an existential fight for the rule of law and our nation's ability to deal with our climate crisis, the tech monopolies, health care and inequality. Many Americans understand this. It is the Democrats responsibility to grow this group into a strong majority that can close the Trump chapter in our history. Impeachment is the way to accomplish that.
If Democrats are timid the road out will be much longer and much more uncertain.
I too, just read the history of those Civil War battles. The cost to the Union for McClellan's extreme caution at every turn in the war is heartbreaking to read.
This is an excellent lesson for our present time. If Democrats don't have the courage to do stand for the laws of our land, and what is right it makes us no better than the Republicans who support Trump's flagrant disregard not just for the law of the land, but for any sense of moral decency.
1
A lot of very good comments and perspectives are shared here. As an independent voter of 30+ years I’m not ready to follow the Progressive charge up impeachment hill. I’ve known Trump to be a vile, uncouth, vapid and disreputable person for 25 years, as anyone living in NYC would know. As the heir to the Roy Cohn school of business and politics, Donald’s field of battle is the field of legal and personal obstruction and intimidation. It mostly worked in real estate and business battled which enabled a relatively small time businessman to get big time attention.
This country is in a different place than 1973-74 and the Clinton example just shows the incoherent emotional force of the Republican charge up the same hill. No. While Donald is unfit for the Presidency, he has been since Inauguration Day. Nothing that he has done or is doing is a surprise. This man must be defeated. That is the only language that he will understand. He needs to be repudiated by the American people at large, not by th 20% who demand impeachment. That he remains popular with 40%+ of the public in spite of a booming economy is the opening for an electoral strategy to defeat him. That he remains popular with 40%+ given his malfeasance should give pause to anyone contemplating plunging the nation into the vortex of impeachment.
5
The next presidential election will be won in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Florida, so in order to know the cards the opposition has, it is not necessary to study, poll and test the entire nation. Wither the 9-12 Million voters who voted for Obama twice and then Trump? Speaker Pelosi, however, has a more complicated task and that is to reclaim three or four of these and hold Virginia - and, hold her House majority which runs through the suburbs in these and other states. Add to the mix the need to reclaim a Senate majority lest the next Democratic President be compelled to stand and watch as Democratic legislation stalls, stuck in Mitch McConnell's briar patch. Easy and tempting as it is to cast the cautious Speaker as a latter-day George McClellan, I believe that Gerry Nadler and Adam Schiff will rise to be our U.S. Grant and W. T. Sherman and with their investigations, even if short of a vote to impeach, will keep the drip, drip, drip of revelations coming in sufficient supply to gird the loins of the coalition of '18 to provide victory in '20.
1
I don't like making this analogy, but Pelosi is being like McConnell, she is putting her party before the health of the country. I don't want to lose 2020 to Trump either, but more importantly, I don't want to lose our democracy and our constitutional checks and balances.
4
@Gary W She is one of the few people, in either party, who speaks up truthfully and says exactly what she needs to say and no more.
2
Mr. Bouie's analogy with what is known as the Battle of the Seven Days does not work. The Democrats can indeed impeach Trump. However, the chances of a "conviction" by a 2/3 Senate majority are exactly zero. Thus, the Democrats have a choice to either mount a campaign as to why they are the only choice for the country in 2020, or to bring the country to a halt while they tilt at the windmill of impeachment. My guess is that the higher probability path to recapturing the White House is the former and not the latter. Meanwhile, the courts can sort out the many disputes between Congress and the Executive. Recent Supreme Court decisions reveal that the Court is not a stacked conservative stronghold. My confidence is their application of the rule of law remains strong.
1
Impeachment will only work as a political strategy if it isn't all-consuming but is being paralleled by, or embedded into, equally forceful efforts to contrast the negative impacts of Trump politics. There must be focus on adequate health care for all, better education to attain better paying jobs, addressing a crumbling infrastructure, and, yes, closing the wealth gap that has been widening through Trump's tax cuts for the rich.
In my view, only a combination of impeachment procedures which would stress the moral unfitness of Trump and policy proposals that would stress the inability of Trump to improve the lives of the average American does have a high chance of succeeding in getting rid of Trump in 2020.
3
On every nightly show on MSNBC, they should have 15 minutes of policy ideas. All Trump, every minute, won’t provide an alternative.
1
I just wrote John Lewis who thank god is my representative. I am begging him and fellow Democrats to start impeachment proceedings. Evidence and subpoenas in furtherance of impeachment cannot be challenged and will be summarily upheld by the courts.
Trump has violated his oath of office more times than I can count, consorts and relishes fascists, disregards the rule of law and abhors the separation of powers and the Constitutional checks and balances.
GOP could care less about Trump's attack on our democracy and the reaction to the subpoena to Don Jr.by GOP leaders shows that SNL got it right this week. Allegiance to Trump comes before allegiance to the Constitution for most of the GOP.
Is that why Orban got abig welcome today at the White House?
We know how that cult worship
ended in Germany, Japan, Italy and Soviet Union.
3
@LVG
Yes, by all means, start impeachment now! Impeachment being a political not a legal process it all comes down to how many votes do you have! Even the Speaker can count, which is why there won’t be any move to impeach as long as she is the Speaker.
The only way for the Trump Loathers here and in the Congress to get their way is first to remove Speaker Nancy. Those who survive that process can move on to the President who will be even tougher!
Yeah, because John Lewis needs a lecture on how to fight the bad guys.
Good grief.
An impeachment inquiry will help to put the facts before the voter and limit Trump's ability to use the courts to block the House's "legitimate legislative purpose."
The author points out the biggest flaw in the nervous Democrat argument, that impeachment will solidify Trump's base, when the author points out his base is already solidified.
An impeachment inquiry will solidify the DEMOCRATIC base and why would any Democrat fear that?
The House part of impeachment is designed to be partisan. That is why only a simply majority is needed to do so.
Imagine if a president's party, in the House minority, could block the evidence from coming forward of a president's wrong doing. The people would never know.
It would render the impeachment clause more meaningless than current Democrats render it so when they claim there is nothing you can do without 2/3rds in the Senate to convict.
1
It's a strong argument but the analogy is not quite right. McClellan constantly overestimated the strength of his opponent and did not check the reality. Yes the Democrats have the House but they do not have the Senate. It's as if McClellan only had half the U.S. Army willing to obey his commands. He was not so hobbled, the current Congress is.
Any attempt at a Conviction following a successful Impeachment with this Senate would fail. Perhaps after the upcoming election, should there be no change in the President, that may not be the case. But for now it is.
At this point, expose the reality. Committee hearings, public ones, are what are needed. You need to build the case, overwhelmingly, for the election or for a post election Impeachment. And if HE looses, then HE can be prosecuted for any malfeasance for which there is evidence. Dig for and mine that evidence!!!
2
It’s an interesting take, but I’m not sure of the analogy. I’m hesitant about areas I know little about (military strategy), but McClellan was almost pathologically hesitant militarily. Trump supporters absolutely believe that he is being victimized by Dems who want to overturn the election. That’s their slogan and they’re sticking to it. And impeachment is an attempt to overturn an election which is why it is so tricky. But Congress can open an investigation regarding the grounds for impeachment and that would give them even stronger subpoena power which in turn might lead to more focused subpoenas. It seems to me the sky is raining subpoenas now and it might turn people off. Also congress seems to be acting high handedly by not revealing who will do the questioning, if there are any limits, etc. I don’t think the right strategy is as clear as many claim it is, but I think Pelosi might be right when she said he is taunting us into impeachment. He’s the honey badger as several people have characterized him...nastiest animal in creation.
1
Unfortunately for the Democrats, their general is Nancy Pelosi. Like McClellan, she thinks victory is assured and is not going to risk attacking Trump. Her strategy is to rely on the 2020 election.
The correct lesson to draw from the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson is that President Donald Trump acted within his constitutional powers when he fired FBI Director James Comey.
The House of Representatives voted to impeach President Andrew Johnson on grounds his firing of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton violated the Tenure of Office Act, which Congress has passed in 1865 to protect Stanton. Johnson though the act was unconstitutional because it violated the separation of powers principle by denying the president authority to fire executive branch officials at will.
Jonson was acquitted by the Senate and subsequently vindicated by federal court rulings. Congress repealed the Tenure of Congress Act in 1878.
1
Perhaps, but the article is not about Johnson but rather about General McClellan’s abject failure to take action in the face of Lee’s Army.
2
@Sam Keats
The author’s contention that there is some sort of parallel between the Peninsula Campaign of 1862 and presidential impeachment is bizarre. McClellan did take action, and the results was disastrous.
@Sam Keats
There is nothing to learn about presidential impeachment from the Peninsula Campaign of 1862.
House Democrats could vote tomorrow to impeach, but they know most Americans are against it.
trump was born a criminal.
his entire "fortune" is based on illegally laundering russian mob money from the 1980s onward.
it would take one hour of concentrated hearings to make that point clear as day.
why are these spineless democrats unwilling to do that?
4
@harvey wasserman
Perhaps they would move to impeach if you send them the “proof” of the President’s “Crimes” that only you possess!
The Ways and Means Committee requested six year of Tump’s tax return to conduct “oversight” of “the extent to which the IRS audits and enforces the Federal tax laws against a President.” The Treasury rightly suspects the “request is the culmination of a long-running, well-documented effort to expose the President’s tax returns for the sake of exposure.” If the committee is interested in ensure The IRS correctly audits and enforces tax laws against sitting presidents, why did it ask for Trump’s tax returns for four years when before he became president.
The Treasury Department has refused to turn over President Trump’s tax returns to the committee on grounds that “the Supreme Court had made clear that exposure for sake of exposure is never a permissible purpose of Congressional inquiries, and this principle is all the more important when legally protected information is at stake.”
The Treasury Department’s letter of refusal is online at
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Secretary-Mnuchin-Response-to-Chairman-Neal-Plus-Appendix-A.pdf
2
Unlike McClellan, we do know what the secessionist, anti republic Republican forces and their in the Senate are . They will excuse anything this President does. An impeachment that fails in the Senate would be a disaster. Pelosi is a Grant, not a McClellan. Here is what we should do. Impeach the Attorney General. Send the House Sargent at Arms and lock the head of the IRS for failure to respond to a lawful demand. As the confederate generals fall, so will the confederacy.
6
@Homer. Agreed. Go for Barr immediately.
The Fall of 45 President Donald Trump his act already lead to Impeachment the division possible gap wide.
Country Hall Congress democracy ,dangers call constitutional crisis as for America people seat on every words of elect. officer what he or she will do.
America People at Wall Fort Sumter on sing . The Battle hymn of the Republic . Only President Donald Trump and Senator Graham, Mc Connell will sing this song with me.
Lord say know me by works...
1
Don't make it an either-or, do both.
The House Judiciary Committee should focus on impeachment. House policy committees should be passing bills on infrastructure, healthcare, environment, minimum wage, campaign finance, gun safety, etc. etc. Everything will die in the Senate. Dems can truthfully argue they've done everything they can do and it's a do-nothing Senate and corrupt White House that must be changed in 2020.
Nancy Pelosi should also narrate exactly what's happening every day on Twitter. "While Trump spent his day complaining about (insert clownish obsession) here's what the Democrats did today......." - free exposure for the Dems, realize Trump's power here and match it.
7
Trump is currently tampering with witnesses in an effort to obstruct justice. He is attacking Don McGann and Christopher Wray who are both witnesses to his obstruction of justice. Begin publicly televised impeachment hearings now.
2
Excellent column, Mr. Bouie. And chilling, utterly chilling.
I would look closer to our time to understand Trump and the context we are in Naomi Klein’s books “The Shock Doctrine” and her later work “No Is Not Enough.” Klein’s work points toward the way in which Trump exploits the shock value and attention of his words and actions in order to feed the bottomless pit of his ego driven narcissism. Congress is not grasping the gravity of his character. This is someone who is not going to acknowledge an election, not anything else for that matter, which does not serve his narcissism disorder. Secondly, but just importance, Congress is ignoring the religious leaders around him, who elevate him to the level of a demagogue. He is at the center of their insane apocalyptic mania of destruction for their utopian second coming. To ignore this does not help. Congress needs to wake up to what they are dealing with in this man.
1
The Democratic House of Representatives can bring impeachment proceedings against Trump. The Republican Senate will not find him guilty. It probably would not find him guilty if he was filmed mowing down dozens of people with an automatic weapon on the streets of New York.
The result will be that he can brag that he was found not guilty of anything. His base will be even more sure that he is the victim. And a lot of people who are on the fence will be so disgusted with the whole political fiasco (remember the Clinton impeachment) that they will either vote for him or stay home.
The House can do everything it can to make the truth public. That truth can be used over and over again in political ads. But actually trying to impeach the monster in the White House is a useless endeavor because of the monsters in the Senate.
2
The analogy is fatally flawed in its suggestion that righteousness is somehow the equivalent of actual power. Trump has the votes, and that's all that matters. If you want to drag the Civil War into this, try imagining what would have happened to the Union if McClellan had attacked and lost, by no means an impossibility. The defeat crushes the Union spirit, resulting in an erosion of support of the utterly discouraged northern states. England probably enters the war on the side of the Confederacy, and the Union dissolves.
Actually, in fact, the Union did win the war, as I recall. But today, in 2019, we get one shot. One. Wasting it on a mathematical impossibility will end in failure that will only embolden the right.
One last thought; the dichotomies of class, race and morality, if not created by the civil war 150 years ago, were sealed in blood by that conflict, and are palpable even in this debate. Our task is not just to defeat Trump. Our task is to free ourselves from the sin of slavery, of the body and of the mind. The entire process of electing a candidate, being reliant on persuasion which is reliant on empathy, makes me yearn for an electoral victory, not just the revenge of an impeachment. Not because Trump deserves better, but because we do.
4
It's a waste of time and resources to issue articles of impeachment against Trump when there's almost no chance of his being convicted in the Senate.
1
Put a stake in the sand and say impeachment. Take the initiative and put Trump back on his heels. Why are our Dems always bringing a knife to a gunfight?
1
Speaker Pelosi please initiate impeachment proceedings for the life of our democracy.
2
To The Honorable Nancy Pelosi: "I beg to assure you that I have never written you, or spoken to you, in greater kindness of feeling than now, nor with a fuller purpose to sustain you, so far as in my most anxious judgment, I consistently can. But you must act."
3
Try, “but you must vote.”
For a change, South End of a North bound freight.
I think you have to move forward with impeachment for no other reason than to put senators on the record. Choose to side with Trump after all that has transpired will definitely hurt their odds of re-election especially in competitive states.
Make them put their money where their mouth is. Side with Trump and risk losing your seat or side against him to save your own skin.
1
With enough Senate votes to remove the corrupt and criminal Trump,
the House needs to publicly try RICO Donnie through various committee proceedings.
The Mueller Report is a TREASURE MAP.
It is NOT EVIDENCE.
It is a bibliography.
The underlying interviews, interview records (302's), and grand jury transcripts are the treasure.
Start the legal process NOW to get the Grand Jury stuff.
Be prepared for a pageant of testimony: McGahn, Donaldson, Kushner, Preibus, Kelley, etc. etc. etc.
Push on the tax returns....hold both Munchkin and the IRS director in contempt and sue for the returns.
Possible corruption, possible criminal activity, possible legislative action are all valid reasons for the production.
Push on national security issues, waivers,
hearings on each and every contact by a Trump stooge with a Russian.
Testimony on each Russian's connection to Soul Daddy Vlady.
Death of the Trump Error by a thousand cuts to November 2020.
3
Lately, I read the NYT for entertainment purposes and this is another of those hilarious “world is ending” articles about impeachment.
The vast majority of the country can’t figure out what has you liberals are excited. Not much has changed for us. Life is pretty much like it was with Obama, and Bush before him. Society proceeds, jobs are available, courthouses are open, our kids go to school, cops patrol, the garbage gets picked up, etc. etc.
Impeaching Trump is the greatest gift Liberals could give Republicans, so have at it, watching you all insist on snatching defeat from jaws of victory is fun to watch.
2
Who can take Pelosi seriously?If u have spent your entire career in politics and never gotten ur law degree, that is an unforgivable act of self indulgence. Huey P. Long graduated from Tulane Law School in 8 months while holding public office, and was 1 of the most popular and effective populist governors state has ever had, likewise his brother, Earl Daddy Long who was in office when I was in school there in early 1960's. What was stopping Pelosi?Accusing HRC and Biden of criminal behavior an impeachable offense? Do u mean that Hunter Biden, discharged from armed forces for possession of cocaine, then using his father's influence to make deals with Urkrainian business interests ,these actions do not skirt the edge of legality, and HRC selling pardons to felons in return for hefty contributions is not criminal?If author accuses our vox populi of lawlessness w/o specifying what laws he has broken,charge falls flat.Third you r writing for an unsophisticated audience if u maintain that slavery was a major cause of the Civil War.It was a side issue and fundamental cause was states rights, right of a state to withdraw from a union it had joined VOLUNTARILY, and were it not for the protectionist policies of the northern states which stifled southern commerce, conflict could have been avoided.Finally,a true historian of the south would have taken a firm stand in favor of keeping Confederate statues, a part of our history.Do u consider urself a true son of the south?
1
@Alexander Harrison, Remember all those white flags your ancestors were waving after they lost the war that they started in defense of slavery and for the destruction of the Union? Slavery/white power was the issue with your side, and decades of shameful Jim Crow laws show that. I'd be OK with the stars and bars and your rebel statues if you flew those white flags with them to remind everybody that you lost. Y'all are lucky that the North was so gentle with you after your defeat.
2
@Hector The nullification movement Jackson had to deal with was about the cotton tariff, and SC unwillingness to pay. Definite states rights issue. Ultimately it didn't come to blows then, and delayed the Civil War ~ 2 decades but Jackson was angry and ready to lead troops himself into SC if the state did not capitulate.
If I follow your analogy correctly, you would equate George McClellan with Nancy Pelosi. That doesn't work. Pelosi survived tough times for the Democrats but kept the faith and the offensive. She took back the House decisively, regained the speaker's gavel, and since then has led a relentless offensive against Trump that has kept moving forward on a variety of fronts. To my mind, Ulysses Grant is a much more apt comparison for Pelosi. Taking back the House was the Vicksburg campaign. Now she has embarked on the Overland Campaign. sustained pressure against a skilled and stubborn enemy. Impeachment would be like Stonewall Jackson's flanking move at Chancellorsville -- flashy and impressive. But you know what: Jackson got himself killed doing that. As for Grant, he won the war. I'm sticking with Gen. Pelosi.
2
What a coincidence. I've been reading Gore Vidal's "Lincoln" and thinking that the crisis of Trump is not comparable to the crisis of the Civil War. We're facing a Constitutional crisis, but we don't actually have states leaving the Union or armies clashing in battle.
Yet, Mr. Bouie finds a credible analogy for a our current political power-struggle in McClellan's dithering before Lee's army. Well done. If nothing else, the analogy is instructive and underlines the danger of the Democrats' indecisiveness.
3
This argument makes complete sense. This may be a case of those who hesitate are lost. Confidence and action show strength and willingness to act. Strength and willingness to act inspire more confidence and willingness to act in the general pubic. This is how a mission grows and reinforces itself, and strength reinforces itself. It is time to act and not miss the opportunity and the opening of a path to success. Hesitation seems to imply weakness. Too much analysis also implies lack of conviction. Better to gather resources and energy and courage and forge ahead with clear eyed spirit.
6
BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD analogy. Pelosi is right. Trump deserves to be impeached but the Senate will NEVER NEVER NEVER vote to convict -- and that is if Mitch McConnell decides to schedule a trial and doesn't treat an impeachment vote from the House like he treated Merrick Garland's nomination. Remember the old saying: "when you go after the king be sure you can bring him down." Clinton's impeachment brought a wave of sympathy for him. It will be no different if Trump is impeached.
@Bob, Trump is not a king. Nothing royal or princely about him except for his millions of bootlickers, stooges, and sycophants. He's more of a second rate robber baron, a third world dictator who will likely be taken down by his fellow criminals when he's no longer useful to them. He needs to be impeached because he is bad for America.
4
No doubt about it, Trump deserves to be impeached. But Mr. Bouie and all those who question why Ms. Pelosi and other Democrats are hesitating are not looking at the broad picture. As he rightly points out, Trump’s approval rating is so low that it is unlikely that he can energize his base to turn an impeachment into a reason to prevail in November 2020. If that were the whole story, I think every House Democrat would be clamoring to sign a bill of impeachment. But it is not. There are enough purple districts that were won by very narrow margins in 2018 that there is a very real possibility that we could see a Democratic president inaugurated in January 2021 who would face two years of trying to carry out her or his agenda with a Republican House and Senate. How does that help us?
Darn it - I’m a Democrat and getting more and. It’s tired of this impeachment drivel.
Just because a Republican does it does not make it a high crime or misdemeanor.
Please get a grip, you wild-eyed liberals are making us normal Democrats all look like sore losers who can’t win at the election booth, and so we want to destroy the country to get our way.
8
@Jimmy
"Just because a Republican does it?" If Obama had committed even 1% of Trump's perfidy he would have been impeached, removed, and possibly worse. Also, I very much doubt you are a Democrat.
2
The lessons I take from the Civil War era is not from McClellan’s dithering but the failure of Reconstruction to punish treason effectively and with lasting results; to not permanently safeguard against the scales of justice being corrupted based on psychopathic racism, and so on.
We dithered then, and here it is.
10
This is age old for the Democrats. They always have the high ground but fight like they're the underdogs mired in a swamp. They continually allow Republicans to misrepresent myriad issues without a word of protest, so much so that much of the electorate thinks being pro-choice is the same as being pro-abortion. As a result Republicans are now pounding away with reckless-abandon on women's hard-earned right to choose, yet nary a single word of appalled protest can be heard from the Democratic ranks for fear of offending some Republican-Democrats that might vote against them in 2020. So long as Democrats refuse to fight and use facts to educate the electorate, they will continuously get beaten like McClellan.
3
Trump thrives on doing battle with his "enemies," especially those who take his bait. Speaker Pelosi has bested him more than once. We need to trust her political judgment when to hang back and when to push forward.
4
The confederate in the white house is also manipulating the stock market for his friends. He is doing this in plain sight. Go hard, go fast, go right at him! Now! Now! Now! It is not about elections its about what is the moral object of government. The democrats have the slows. You are right sir.
6
i am confident that Nancy Pelosi will let her inner Daenerys out and say the magic word: DRACARYS.
2
Apples and oranges. This is actually worse than your article on supposed failure by Grant to redistribute southern landowners’ property to freed spaces. Who are you, and why do you get to put forth these unsophisticated, unsubstantiated positions on the national stage. Do your research, man.
4
A pathetic analogy comparing a dispute between a general who would not fight and his president to a Democrat party which will soon be at war between its lunatic fringe and the old butt grabber. Wait till the Bronx waitress has to explain how every building in the country will be rebuilt and the economics of a single health system run by the govenment when Medicare is driving the country broke (regardless of what recipients might think). There is no Santa Claus and there is not Trust Fund that actually has assets.
4
Here is Mueller's report:
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
This is the site it came from:
https://www.justice.gov/sco
1
Speaking of war, the Constitution and lessons from history, is it not odd that this paper will not say one thing against what appears a likely spun narrative for conflict with Iran or Venezuela being generated from the "intelligence" spin machine. I wonder what Speaker Pelosi's position on this topic might be?
There are no comments allowed on the "stories", which sit side by side on the front paged entitled:
1. "White House Reviews Military Plans Against Iran, in Echoes of Iraq War"
2. " Claim of Attacks on 4 Oil Vessels Raises Tensions in Middle East"
The articles do not challenge the so-called "facts" or "premise" of those who are clearly the sources of this data.
Those who have followed the history of the 5th estate know that some papers have long been willing to violate the principles of the Journalists creed as part of their contract with clandestine operations, regardless of any moral, ethical or truth based duty to question the source and or its motives from either a spiritual or ethical perspective.
These seems readily evident in the case of what is clearly a narrative of conflict being spun out.
It is utterly shameful to me. It isn't for lack of cause that the the paper doesn't allow comments on such "news."
7
Thank you, Mr. Bouie, for a great column. I agree that the Dems are showing themselves to be afraid of their own shadow and quickly letting the iron cool before taking the proverbial strike at it. Do the Dems have a plan when Trump wins re-election? I hope it's better than this plan of theirs to avoid impeachment at all costs.
3
The Martha Stewart school of prosecution - She didn’t commit a crime. But she obstructed justice. Even though there was no justice to obstruct. That’s your core competency?
2
Bill Clinton is no Martha Stewart.
2
With Donny Reb occupying The White House and his Kentucky Col. Mitch McConnell the Senate, the Democrats have been on the defensive. Nancy Pelosi has won some initial skirmishes on the battle of the shutdown, government hostages, and the wall, but she's been too McClellan-like in her stance on impeachment. Donny Reb cares not a wit about the Constitution, but all about white supremacy and racial superiority over people of color. We are at a Gettysburg moment and Speaker Pelosi has to take and defend the high ground of Little Round Top [aka the Constitution]. The forces of obstruction and "nullification" are charging hoping to overthrow the "rule of law" with the "rule of Trump" and Ms. Pelosi must like Joshua Chamberlain roll out the heavy artillery that's the Constitution's ultimate weapon of defense--impeachment--to repulse them. She doesn't have to be on offense, but use the Constitution to save our democracy so that "government of the people, by the people, and for the people does not perish from the earth." The moment is now; the fate of the Republic is in her hands.
2
This historical 'analogy'
an attempt at 'reflecting' modern day events..
is insightful in my thinking....
about the downsides
of 'inaction' ..
of waiting for elections
but it would seem to me that another
perhaps more obvious historical thread....
might be even more enlightening...
... this would be the impeachment proceedings
of our 1868 president ..Andrew Johnson..
and the journalistic /historical perspective
of what led to it ?
and what came of it ?
I`m thinking many would see similarities between this day and age ..and our not quite buried past
trumps horde is fighting a defensive action
no army can win a war on the defense.
patton's quote; "Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more"
Democrats have to be aggressive to win
3
Great use of real history, and a very apt situational analysis.
3
I agree these are different times so when people allude to what happened to the Democrats after the Bill Clinton impeachment, Trump's crimes are so much worse. Yes, impeachment is divisive but so is Trump, and dangerously incompetent. Add corrupt, dishonest, and self serving it appears imperative and inevitable. The time to impeach is now, especially if it facilitates the release of evidence that Trump and his Republican cohorts are trying so hard to keep hidden.
2
Unfortunately, Democrats are outnumbered: they have only the House, but the Senate—led by McConnell—has declared the battle over before it starts.
Every Constitutional instinct says this man should be impeached; he has warned it more than anyone before. But without authority from the courts to get an unredacted copy of Mueller’s report, or any other material Trump claims through executive privilege, the path forward will be perceived as purely political. Should Mueller himself testify before the House, the dynamics might change, but otherwise Trump’s strategy of running out the clock seems guaranteed by the GOP-controlled Senate.
1
As I have recently been watching the excellent "Civil War" series by Ken Burns, Mr Bouie's article really resonates.
Not only for the correlation drawn to McClelland, but the inability for protagonists to see a wider picture or understand, objectively, their job in a time of crisis.
This is often why history is written as it is; Our inability to read history and take its lessons is why we are oft doomed to repeat it.
I'm not sure it is Representative Pelosi's job to stack the cards in an effort to wrangle government. It is definitely her job to pursue offenders if they are operating outside the Constitution or the law. The checks and balances then come into effect as they were designed to do. Through this, the transparency we all need as voters is revealed and we then do our job of selecting executive representation. While that means that at some stage we actually need to get off the couch and vote - that is our job too.
1
I do not believe the Democrats need to be so fearful of voters. Trump's win was a reflection of voters' irrational dislike of Hillary, which Trump was able to amplify. The Clintons were dogged for years and the basis of voters' dislike of Hillary was irrational. How could she possibly have won? I was not surprised by the outcome. Currently, there are candidates who are uninspiring, or "too old." There will be some voters who will never vote for a woman. We will likely experience more Russian interference, especially since Trump assumes he will be helped by it. However, no candidate provokes the same level of animosity that Hillary did. Trump can be impeached and Democrats can win - but we must get out the vote!
6
Nancy Pelosi has plenty of spine; the partial government shutdown early in the year made that plain. She is looking ahead at impeachment and sees that the Senate will never vote to convict, at least not before January of 2021. This will be true no matter what endless investigations reveal. Therefore —and here I believe Pelosi is absolutely right — if Trump is merely impeached but not removed from office, he will declare VICTORY and gain strength in so doing.
I consider impeachment without removal from office a deep wound to a president, but Trump and his backers will tell it differently; they will never cease blaming the Democrats.
4
First off only 37% of Americans favor impeachment probably regarding it like the fool's errand it is. trumps approval is 42%, he won the election with not much more than that. Keep in mind it's not the number of votes as much as where those voters live. So right now there is about 4% standing between trump and re-election, and I have to think a lot of that 4 % are in the 37% that disapprove of impeachment. And what will impeachment accomplish? Will it give the House any tools that it doesn't already have? Will it change any minds? Will it end in conviction? No, No NO. It doesn't take a genius to see a line from a useless impeachment to trumps re-election. Impeachment is a short term feel good with an unacceptable price.
4
I think of the missed opportunities in Lincolns little noted and long forgotten speech at Gettysburg in November of 1863. Lincoln failed to brag about the size of the crowd that came to see him, failed to get them chanting "lock him up", ( Stephen Douglas), failed to blame the war on illegal immigrants, etc. etc.
Lincoln totally forgot that it was all about him and spoke only words meant to heal a war torn nation. What a missed opportunity.
9
Given the circumstances, by not exercising its constitutional powers, the House diminishes its coequal status.
8
The brutal truth is that it would take 19 Republican senators voting to convict to make impeachment worthwhile. Without a conviction, which seems unlikely at best, what value is there in impeachment?
1
Dear Mr. Bouie,
Your historical reference is most germane. I do not believe that Speaker Pelosi can break her peer influence from the big money and lobbyists and the DCCC establishment, Wall Street operatives, who count on the long term and on-going corruption of both sides of the isles.
I do not believe that Speaker Pelosi is fundamentally hesitant but instead has been told by the likes of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and other major contributors to the "establishment" "Democratic party" dark money pools, that she is not to engage Trump but rather to frame the issue as if the party would be "baited" into conflict.
In this case, it is not only her moral obligation to follow her sworn oath to defend the Constitution and freedom through engaging impeachment preceedings, it is also the right thing to do on every front.
If I thought Pelosi was soley driven by "doing the right thing" for the Constitution, the average American citizen, or pure moral and ethical impetus, I would have also believed that George Bush beat Al Gore nearly two decades ago.
The depth of corruption in the political and institutions and agencies of our nation are a shameful testament to human nature and the corrupting influence of money. Corruption and tyranny have a way to rising to the top in all societies.
I would call upon the example of Churchill and even Jesus in times such as these to provide an example of courage and sacrifice, which are the qualities we need most today if freedom will live
12
Brilliant analysis. I’m in total agreement. The corruption and moral decay of America is symbolized by Pelosi’a preposterous lack of action. The Dems are “owned” as surely as the GOP is.
2
That was an analysis?
You have to be kidding.
1
On another note: look at the picture of Lincoln. He was still a young man. The Lincoln who gave the Second Inaugural was an old man. He suffered a lot because he was a man of conscience and responsibility. To have Trump sitting at Lincoln's desk is a desecration.
13
@XXX
Beautifully rendered, scathing observation about DJT. It is a desecration, as you said, to have Trump anywhere near the time-honored relics in the White House. And it is perilous folly to have him anywhere near the "nuclear football."
1
Excellent historical analogy. However, I think it's too soon to compare Pelosi to McClellan. If House Democrats cannot get Mueller and McGahn to testify and it will require a lengthy legal battle (including the tax returns) - that's when Lincoln's call to action applies and impeachment becomes essential.
5
"democrats have the upper hand" - how can you say that for an impeachment process when republicans have a senate majority and it takes 2/3 majority to remove from office? And Pence isn't as offensive as Trump. Better to run against Trump than Pence.
1
@Smokey: pence is a non-issue. As you said, the House can initiate impeachment proceedings, but not cause the process to culminate in his removal, as a result of this vile Senate. So what? If it’s the right thing to do, then it needs to be part of the permanent record of this democracy that one side still supports the rule of law.
4
McClellan is the kind of general I want to serve under. I don’t want to be in a fight, where I am risking my life, where the outcome is 50-50. I don’t consider that smart because in a situation like that I am just canon fodder. Just being thrown into a battle that’s just the toss of a coin is not for me. I prefer a 70/30 outcome where I know the battle will be over quickly with much less casualties. McClellan didn’t see the 70/30 and so he held back – good for him. While Lincoln was operating emotionally because I doubt he any better intelligence then McClellan did. What we know about the alignment of forces now, is not what they knew at the time. Sorry to break bubbles but Lincoln was not infallible.
This is similar for the Trump impeachment which today I would put at 95/5 against - the Senate would just voted it down and Trump would label himself “the Comeback kid” and the Dems would be “losers.” So we have to wait for an opening and then strike. I am with Pelosi.
7
Impeachment will be a waste of time. Obviously the Senate will not uphold a House impeachment resolution. Trump then laughs at the Democrats and emerges in a stronger position. Also, the undertone that Trump must be impeached in order to deny him a re-election victory is philosophically and politically flawed. Is the impeachment effort simply intended to thwart a feared expression of the electorate's decision? Is the anti- Trump position so weak that resort to non-electoral means are needed to prevent him from remaining in office?
8
@BDIMpeachment would be a means to gather all the charges against him and deal with them and him in one process. It would be a very serious legal proceeding. To not support it in the Senate would make the Republicans look like wooses at best and traitors at worst. Impeachment is an affirmation that we are a nation of LAWS, that we are following the laws, that at least some of our elected representatives are acting on principle and not simply afraid of the show.
7
@BD Yeah, here's the thing, Trump lies on average 6 times a day. That's not an opinion, look it up. We've gotten so that his juvenile attacks and meanderings on Twitter aimed at lawmakers, judges, movie stars, athletes, his own hires...seem normal to some and just his "style" to others. No, not normal, and frankly, the world is laughing while important allies wonder if there's any way to work with the US at this point. Today, Hungary's dictator president (really a dictator, Trump's not there yet) was received warmly at the White House by our President who served up unfettered praise for Viktor Orban. Here's one of Orban's typical nationalist rallying cries from about a year ago: "We must state that we do not want to be diverse. ... We do not want our own color, traditions and national culture to be mixed with those of others." News is now controlled by his supporters, the constitution has been re-written to strengthen the presidency and weaken the judiciary, NGO's are shuttered by force and universities stifled or, in one case, expelled from Hungary. Trump's a bad dude and we will be sorry, all of us, if we don't move to remove him and his ilk now. IMO
1
Nicely done. And I posted very similar thoughts about speaker Pelosi and Joe Biden today at the Daily Kos: here:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/13/1857090/-McKibben-is-Right-We-need-a-Sea-Change-in-the-Zeitgeist-Biden-and-Pelosi-aren-t-providing-it
I do recommend James M. McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era" for a complete picture of the military and political - and the ideas behind the war.
One other thought linking this caution of the Democrats about the Green New Deal and impeachment too. David Roberts at Vox says they suffer from Stockholm Syndrome: after 30 years or more intellectual capture by Neoliberalism, they share too many ideas about the role of the government and the private sector with Republicans to imagine circumstances where those ideas would have to go.
With the Union Army, heading into the fame of Robert E. Lee, who had out psyched his opposite numbers, except perhaps at Gettysburg, Grant at one point admonished his officers to stop worrying about what "Bobby Lee" was going to do - turn somersaults and appear in your rear - and start planning what you were going to do."
The kids are right to ask the Dems - the Sunrisers and AOC: Where's the Plan? They have none. The Green New Deal is the answer, and had we had the Standing Select Committee, the complaints against it all would have had a hearing and a forum to get to the policy details of how to do it. Pelosi was too afraid to grant that power and that standing.
2
Thank You.
I am daily aggravated at democratic plotting for 2020. Ceding Trump another five-hundred-plus days? Really? This man's actions (and words, of course) even before he ran for president (he and his father were successfully sued by the federal government for blatantly keeping African Americans out of their apartment complexes in the 1970's, shameful lawbreaking that somehow is rarely discussed) would have, in the near past, disqualified any aspiring presidential candidate. The disgusting "boy banter" with Access Hollywood host, Billy Bush, while on the set of a daytime soap opera in 2005, is accessible online and frankly hard to listen to for its utter depravity. Of course, one must not leave out the libelous, so-called birther movement that claimed President Obama was not born in the United States; many credit Trump as its father, he was at minimum its chief benefactor. To all of those cretinous credentials, add the likelihood that Trump has obstructed justice while a sitting president, and the very idea that anyone opposed to this man could bide time and look to the next election to (hopefully, maybe, if it breaks our way) for satisfaction, is quite beyond me. Go get 'm now!
5
If Nancy Pelosi doesn't have the courage, or stomach to fulfill her Constitutional imperative to follow through on impeaching the brazen, lawless Donald Trump, then she must resign. Pelosi's over cautious political calculus will backfire, and it's wrong, and immoral. We have an immoral, law breaking, thuggish liar as president, who moons the rule of law, and if he doesn't suffer the consequences, we will contend with far worse in the future. Pelosi is a very wealthy, senior citizen, her time for taking real action may have passed, whatever, but now is not the time to be timid. We need moral courage, and immediately start impeachment proceedings of this lawless president, Donald Trump; he more than deserves it.
3
I think you are right. We should all be familiar enough with Trump by now. He's a bully and a coward at heart, staking out extreme positions then folding if the opponent has resolve. If you are aggressive, he will back down, over and over again. It's always been his nature. Ignore the bluff and press him until he breaks.
3
Actually, there is a different lesson to be drawn from the Civil War and Lincoln's relationships with his generals.
When the Civil War broke out, the commander of the Union forces was Winfield Scott. Scott advised Lincoln to adopt a long-term strategy of strangling the South into submission through economic blockade of Southern ports, among other things. Scott's plan was called the Anaconda Plan. It was the recipe for winning, but it would take time and resources.
Lincoln rejected Scott's plan. He opted for a shorter-term, attack-oriented strategy, beginning with a build-up of land forces. Not blockade, but attack, attack, attack.
Winfield Scott, having failed to persuade the president to adopt a comprehensive plan for winning the war, stepped down in the first year of the war. Lincoln replaced him with...George McClellan.
How did the Union eventually win the war? By blockading the South and splitting the Confederacy at the Mississippi Valley. In other words, by following Scott's Anaconda Plan.
Attack, full frontal assault, charging up that hill--these are not strategies, either in war or in politics. Yes, it might be emotionally satisfying for people who already despise Trump to see impeachment proceedings initiated against him. But for the rest of the country, impeachment is not a priority, and it will not end Trump's presidency. It's a failed, emotionally-driven non-plan.
We have to be patient and win elections. Otherwise Trump's misrule will continue beyond 2020.
4
Trump's base already is "galvanized." They do not care about facts. Demonization of the "other," is all that matters to them. Impeachment or not, their prejudices will not change.
Democrats' usual fearfulness and trepidation is what has allowed Republicans to steal Presidential elections, Supreme Court nominations, putting up with a Rep screaming "liar" to President Obama during a nationally televised address to Congress, and too many other horrors to count.
If Democrats want to "lead," they need to "act."
10
Perhaps it does not matter to the author, but a lot of us so called liberals out there, care more about the rule of law, balance of power, and other aspects of our democracy, more than political victory.
8
If the House impeaches, the Senate won't convict.
Even if the Senate were to convict, we'd get President Pence.
One advantage to impeaching would be increased ability to obtain Trump documents, I read. I agree with Pelosi ... impeaching isn't that appealing.
5
The President and his Vice President are a team. Impeach them both at the same time. Done.
1
"But you must act."
Lincoln's exhortation to Gen. McClellan was apt, for the consequences of not acting would have been--and was--painful.
Telling the Democrats to act against Trump, essentially exhorting them to impeach him, is hardly similar to the situation Lincoln and the country faced.
Impeaching Trump, just because they control the House and can do it, will not accomplish much, for the Senate is controlled by the GOP and McConnell has been anything but critical of Trump. "Case Closed" and all that. Also see, Clinton, William Jefferson.
Investigations that the House has undertaken, along with the testimonies--hopefully, by Mueller and maybe even McGahn--may changethe electorate's attitude towards impeachment. For now, all the public have heard is "no collusion, no obstruction" mantra repeated by AG Barr and his boss Trump.
For now, I'd give Ms. Pelosi the benefit of the doubt. She is no McClellan.
6
@RK Yes. I know this column was heartfelt but we have a wily and experienced leader who knows how to bide her time, marshal her forces and then decisively STRIKE. If General Pelosi says now is not the time I tend to believe her. The analogy I would make is to George Washington or Dwight Eisenhower. Like them, Nancy knows an early ineffectual battle is not what we need. As in 1942, and the early years of the Revolutionary War, there are voices crying for more action. But Nancy knows we need more than action. We have got to win this one.
5
@RK You're right that we should give Pelosi credit for being smart and tough. No McClellan, she. On the other hand, Trump is no Clinton. For one thing, Clinton was pretty popular, as I remember. And, the impeachment of Clinton really was a purely political act, the culmination of a long drawn out fishing expedition that came up empty until they elicited the one (arguably) false statement under oath. The Mueller investigation has hardly come up empty, and there are quite a few plausible cases of dereliction of duty and malfeasance in office that weren't part of that investigation.
Of course the Republicans will say that there are no grounds for impeachment, that it's purely partisan; I'm not sure if they directly compare it to their anti-Clinton efforts, but their thinking is obvious. But, there are objective realities. The Senate Republicans may well refuse to convict, in fact it's almost certain, but it won't be just a replay of the Clinton impeachment with the goalposts reversed. They will be refusing to look at a whole list of evident facts, and their base will get smaller, as more and more normal people look for a way out.
4
@John Bergstrom
I voted for Clinton twice, but he definitely lied and he instructed others to lie to the FBI. He was charged with obstruction of justice, not with having sex with an intern. The charges against Clinton were serious.
Now, consider the unfortunate parallels. Trump, like Clinton, tried to get other people to lie to the FBI to protect him. One of the things he tried to get people to lie about was payments to a woman he had an affair with.
Look, I know that Trump has committed and continues to commit high crimes (emoluments clause, anyone?) and impeachable offenses every day. But most people don't pay attention to politics. They say to themselves (as I did during the Clinton impeachment) Trump is "not perfect" or "showed poor judgment" or "lied about sex." But they won't stop supporting him because of revelations during impeachment proceedings. After all, everyone know that Trump is criminal; they just don't think it is that important.
The electorate as a whole would not reward the Democrats at the ballot box in 2020 for taking up loads of time with futile impeachment proceedings (we know that the Senate will not convict) when the country badly needs healthcare, education, liveable wages, decreased college debt, planning for the disasters of climate change. A quixotic impeachment proceeding--one that we already know is going nowhere--would infuriate not Trump's base, but everyone else.
2
Probably not the best example (I mean really, Johnson was right around the corner), but yes PLEASE let's get on with it and impeach him, really, what do we have to lose?
3
Impeach him. Show the evidence in plain light with testimony that if he wasn’t president he’d already be in jail or at least standing trial. Force republicans to comfort themselves on television, to sweep the mountains of evidence under the rug. The rug isn’t big enough to cover up this pile.
10
The problem that underlies this debate about what to do, other than the grim shadow of the Electoral College, is that 35-40% of the American electorate think that this filthy, corrupt, self-serving, hate-spewing, lying traitor that we have for a President is just terrific. It's really demented. There is no other word for it. Where that leaves us in terms of strategy can be argued. The appalling nature of that reality cannot be argued.
14
@XXX: Yes, it's pretty amazing. And unfortunately, this isn't like a bad bar, that we can just back out of and decide to avoid in the future. And we can't expect them to all go away either. All I can think is that we have to educate their kids somehow, and meanwhile make their lives tolerable enough that they won't totally flip out. The trouble is, their lives really are pretty tolerable already, there aren't the poor, they're the resentful middle class, shepherded by the Koch brothers etc. What a mess!
The Mueller Report showed no collusion with Russia, and any alleged obstruction of justice can be explained by a man defending himself against the malevolence of an entire administration out to get him.
The nearly unredacted version is available to view but no Congressional Democrats have done so, apparently. What. A. Surprise.
Trump is appalling on so many levels and I don’t care if Democrats impeach him or not. He will not be removed from office and should win in 2020 by a landslide. The economy is doing great and Dems and so-called ‘progressives’ have shown themselves unfit to govern at any level of government.
Trump will get his revenge when AG Barr details the corruption in the sainted Barack Obama’s JD and FBI, along with the rot the Clintons have brought to the last campaign. They were the ones who paid for the Russian disinformation that started this entire scam. You know, because it was ‘her turn.’ Lawyer up, Dems!
4
Democrats need to impeach Trump. Put the evidence before the American people and let the Republicans in the Senate try to defend the most corrupt, traitorous occupant of the White House in American history. This will let voters know who to vote for in 2020. Vote against all Republicans running for office in 2020 for the sake of our American democracy!
8
"Damn the torpedo's full speed ahead..." Democrats? Time to stand for something. The rubber hits the road....NOW!
6
Yes! It is the perceived timidity of Democrats that turn off Independent voters, IMO. American voters (except, perhaps, the Democratic base) do not care about issues as much as they care about "authenticity". Obviously Republicans have completely abandoned conservative principles in the face of the Trump administration.
I remember talking to an "Independent" voter in a battleground state on the phone during the Kerry/Bush election. He told me that even though he agreed with Kerry on most issues, he thought Kerry was just saying what people wanted to hear. "I may not agree with Bush", he said, "but I believe he believes what he says he believes". What can you say to that?
Show people you are really prepared to act on your convictions and they will respond positively for the most part, even if they don't necessarily agree with those convictions.
Trump obstructs so blatantly because he does not truly understand his position. He's been insulated by the quasi-shady real estate world of NYC and the ludicrous bubble created by his Reality TV stardom.
Be bold Democrats! We hold the winning hand: truth, accountability, transparency and an obligation under our Constitution. Impeachment proceedings give congress greater constitutional leverage and an opportunity to narrate the president's misdeeds. Of course, the GOP won't convict, but that is not the point.
9
@Christopher: Yes, that feeling people get that someone is telling it like it is... it's bizarre. There was a joke along those lines, something like "People look for authenticity, and when you learn to fake that, you've got it made." But it's not a joke, is it?
2
Very interesting points, Mr. Bouie. I would take issue only with this:
"She continued: 'He knows that it would be very divisive in the country, but he doesn’t really care. He just wants to solidify his base.' Pelosi believes impeachment would backfire and help Trump, raising his chances of re-election."
You don't in fact know that "Pelosi believes impeachment would backfire and help Trump."
What you know is what she *says* about what *Trump* thinks. She may very well be -- I think she is -- playing chess, not checkers. She is very carefully calibrating her message to move incrementally towards accepting impeachment hearings, but she does not want to be perceived as rushing into them.
4
Remember that Lincoln eventually fired McClellan, saying "give me a general who can fight." And then Lincoln hired Grant, who got the job done. The cost was very high, but had the Union not held, we would likely be a continent of multiple different countries much like Europe or South America and not the singular democratic enterprise that we are.
1
That might have been a better outcome.
He could be impeached but never convicted. The voters will sort this out in 11/20. Things have been much messier before.
1
Sorry, but I can't see any good reason why the Peninsular Campaign has a relevance to the current political crisis.
4
A Times pick below by paul from White Plains gets Civil War History seriously wrong. So, to a certain extent does the author. of the opinion piece.
AS for the author's errors, we have a Family Bible from one of my wife's ancestor's. He was in that Army. In that Bible is a letter that he sent home shortly before Lee's big counteroffensive. He said that he could see the Church spires of Richmond and that the Army expected to have the place ina week.
It would have done so, too, except that McClellan lost his nerve.
I think that we have the nerve to seek to impeach Trump. Nancy pelosi and others have just decided that it is bad strategy.
Paul from White Plains says that the Union only won through numbers and resources. False.
The Union forces that took the fierd in the Spring of 1864 outnumbered their opponents by maybe 5 to 3, but the Southern armies were on the defensive and it took a superiority of numbers to constantly attack.
In earlier, Southern, victories, Lee had prevailed by always managing to have more men at the key point where the fighting was happening. In short he out-thought and out-manuvered his earlier opponents. He did the same to grant, twice in the Wilderness battles. And Grant made mistakes, too. But Grant held his nerve, and the Army of the Potomac destroyed the Army of Northern Virginia.
If we are going to look to the Civil war for guidance, we need to get it right.
3
As the saying goes, the Republicans bring knives to a fight, the Democrats bring nail clippers. And what about Mnuchin breaking the law Chairman Neal? If I was caught shoplifting would I be arrested or given a subpoena? But there is one law for the mighty and another for the rest of us. The Dems are being truly timorous and we are kidding ourselves if we think Nancy Pelosi is a political mastermind. Remember, she was the night watchman when the Republicans cleaned our clocks in 2010, the Year of the Great Census Heist.
1
Timorous being defined as nervous, scared, or a lack of confidence. Maybe it’s because of the US Supreme Court? And the Senate has no republicans in name only (RINO). No backbone
As Mr Yeats said, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst / Are full of passionate intensity.”
10
There is no reason to think that impeachment hearings would interfere with Democratic campaigning. Actually, impeachment proceedings in the House do not have to lead to impeachment in the Senate to successfully remove Trump and his loyalists. The more the public knows, the more unpopular they become.
And when it's time to vote to impeach, if Trump has not lost enough Republican votes, Democrats themselves can vote not to impeach for just that reason alone: although the evidence shows that Trump should be impeached, too many Republicans are more loyal to Trump than to America, so proceeding to the Senate is useless.
Even during ongoing impeachment hearings, Democrats can and should continue to propose popular progressive legislation even though they don't have Republican votes in the Senate to pass it. And the Republican voting records and statements will be part of the Democrats campaigns.
Democrats can run on their platforms of healthcare, childcare, environmental programs, social and economic justice, and anti-corruption the same as they should if there are no impeachment hearings and discovery. The message should be that America needs fewer Republicans in Congress and the White House.
And Trump will continue to be Trump...he will continue to blow his one-note horn. As he does that more and shriller, his base will galvanize, but their numbers will continue to shrink. He can't win with just his base, and defending him will be harder for Republican candidates.
6
@Paul Brown Trump hit his highest approval rating last week--46%, Obama was at 44% at the exact same time in his first term. Amongst Republicans his approval rate has remained in the 90's since day one in office.
I wonder what rate it would be if the media hadn't spent 2 yrs spewing lie after lie about the President. It's quite possible the President will be shown to have been correct about even more things when the IG report comes out in the next few weeks.
You say--"the more the public knows the more unpopular they become"---what, like when the public learnt the whole Russian collusion hoax was a con trick by Democrats? What do you mean 'when the public know more they get more unpopular'...? Like when people learn how the economy is doing under Trump, or when they learn how ISIS have been crushed, or when they learn the employment figures?
There is simply nothing Trump can justifiably be impeached for, nothing that any objective observer would think so.
The obstruction charges just don't stand up, the specified instances where Mueller says he can't exonerate Trump because he can't know for certain what was in the mind of Trump, & are so weak. Why obstruct as there's no underlying crime, nothing to cover-up. No ACTUAL obstruction at all, it's all about whether he attempted to obstruct. If there had been collusion then maybe the obstruction claim might have had merit, not now though.
Nancy needs to be reminded of a few applicable sayings:
1. "He who hesitates is lost".
2. "Lead. Follow. Or get the hell out of the way".
Someone must stand up to the bully. Republicans are too cowardly and self-interested. The job falls to the Democrats who won back a majority in the House on the impetus on the voters wanting Trump stopped. Failure to deliver will certainly cause failure in 2020. The time for deliberation is over. Now it's time to act.
Impeach Trump 2019!
7
So if the democrats are equally numbered but think the president has better position...they should ignore the home field advantage and hope for a surrender? Wasn’t the lesson that McClellan was wrong so is Pelosi? Or that it’s a crap shoot with equal numbers? The branches of government being equal.
1
The underlying problem for Pelosi and the House Democrats is that they can have - indeed, do have - a clear majority of the public with them. But the majority does not win a Presidential election. The 2020 election will be totally about the Electoral College. The Republicans will not even pretend otherwise. Indeed, the Electoral College as a constitutional pillar of white rural power in America is part of what appeals to their electorate. So the Republicans will run very frankly and openly on that basis. That is what Pelosi are worried about - a handful of motivated Trumpies can turn a handful of states with a boatload of electoral votes, and the will of the people can be denied - yet again. It is not just, but it is a very real problem.
5
OK. So the Democrats won't initiate the Impeachment process for fear that Trump would win and declare victory that, in his mind, would gain him enough support beyond his base to attain re-election. And Trump is enticing -DARING!- the wary Democratic House to file Articles of Impeachment, knowing full well that the Republican Senate would not sustain the Impeachment.
So, is this strategy McClellan or Machiavellian? For whatever reason the Democratic House would take action, Trump wins the Battle of Impeachment. BUT is winning the Impeachment battle enough to strengthen his base, hence, his electability? Or does his strategy backfire and embolden an already disgusted voter majority to oust him in November 2020?
Polls indicate that Trump would begin the re-election process at a disadvantage in vote count; so it's in his best interest to maintain antagonistic pressure on the Democrats to keep them pre-occupied with Impeachment, thereby preventing the House members from pursuing the agenda on which they were elected. The Democrats must decide which is more achievable over the next two years: Impeachment or Agenda? Interestingly, the Republican Senate controls both issues: whether to oust the President; and/or whether to work with the House on such issues as Infrastructure, Health Care, Education, Immigration, etc.
Of the choices, the most actionable issue before the House Democrats is Impeachment. The Constitution must be protected at any cost. Someone has to do it.
2
@JR Two reasons for timidity -
1. IG report still to drop
2. Potential for massive document declassification which may show the political side of the Russia narrative in a very negative light.
DJT was the human hand grenade rolled into the room by the disgruntled slice of the electorate. They were unapologetically willing to take the risk and prefer that he continues to be the giant throbbing middle finger to career politicians - D or R that he was sent to be.
If the "Resist" movement goes too far out on a limb, they run the risk that that limb might be sawed off. All the folks clamoring for transparency may be running from it if there is contrary information in the source documents that underpin the government arm of the Resist movement.
Presidents come and go. No matter how this ends up career politicians will still have to grapple with how bad they have messed up in the past 30 years, and why a sizeable part of the population despises them.
2
As was proved during the Nixon impeachment exercise, impeaching a President becomes bipartisan, and no longer political, once dangerous and inappropriate actions are discovered. That is why Nixon resigned before impeachment occurred. If the Democrats believe an impeachable offense has occurred, they owe it to the nation to begin proceedings. If they do not think they can show actions that on their face are obviously impeachable, then they should leave the investigations behind and move on with actually governing the country. Short of an impeachable offense, the political circus of both sides should stop.
I don’t understand the analogy to Lincoln and McClellan, and, by the way, Lincoln ultimately fires McClellan.
6
Those who advocate for impeachment at this point rarely address the question of the inevitability of failure in the Senate. That's a really big piece of the problem to be neglecting. Most of what I read says that voters in the middle are, more than anything, tired of all the fighting. They are impatient with Congress for not getting to work on what they want. The general consensus is that 2018 went well for Democrats to the extent that they campaigned on those questions.
There is no historical parallel in the Civil War that is helpful here. What Union general, knowing beforehand that a particular battle would surely be lost if he went at in a certain way, went at it in that way just the same, because it was his duty?
Surely Pelosi is weighing that question and trying to keep the train on the rails, precisely because impeachment will fail and the result appears to be a greater likelihood of Trump winning in 2020.
How many voters are going to vote for the Democratic candidate because the party did what they claimed duty required of them? How many will stay home on election day because they were frustrated with it all?
The right and left are consumed with this, but the middle doesn't glue itself to the news like I do. I read everything I see about the Mueller Report, White House stonewalling, who will testify, subpoenas, legal opinions on the constitutionality of things, you name it, with steam coming out of my ears.
Most voters don't, and that matters.
4
Why are the Republicans in Congress letting Trump destroy our Democracy? 800 prosecutors Trump would be indicted if he were not President. I think that could be amended to add if Barr was not the Attorney General. The Republicans in Congress sticking their heads in the sand is clearly dereliction of duty.
The House Democrats need to get impeachment going ASAP. I feel like our country is like the Titanic in its final moments, The ship is sinking and there are not enough lifeboats to top around.
I was dismayed to see Representative Heck say nobody Is going to jail but fines may be in levied. He may mean well but the Constitution and the rule of laws are being torn to shreds and Trump is increasing his unhinged assault on America.
Trump has the corrupt and disgusting Barr as his Attorney General. McConnell is in Trump's pocket and he can care less about our country and its people. Trump has his flunkies Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. Giving Trump more time to pack our government with his sycophants the greater the risk that our Democracy fails.
I think it's clear that Trump is not going to leave office peacefully and I think he plans to copy Putin and other "presidents" for life. There is no time to lose to hold Trump accountable.
6
I love this country and the ability to voice my opinion and exercise freedom of thought. Let's voice our opinions and share spells we believe to work. Don't forget to vote.
4
God Bless America
2
As I see it putting politics ahead of responsibility is lowering dems standards to that of their counterparts. Dems if nothing else at the very least maintain a level of integrity far above that of current Repubs. If they are to gain control of the presidency and maybe even the senate it will be because people are just plain sick and tired of the disgraceful unpatriotic display taking place today at the congressional right and presidency. Because principles will out trump Trump.
2
What makes this piece ring true is that Donald Trump and the GOP are really going back to fight the battles that the Confederacy lost more than 150 years ago. With each day, we see that America's sin of slavery, represents the grand old days for Trump's fine people. The GOP is nostalgic for white privilege and plantation life, where a rich white man can inflict his will on the world unchecked. Donald Trump is popular because he is living out the dream of poor, rural, uneducated, impotent white people.
9
I'd like to just say that this is an impressive piece of writing. I read NYT op-eds all the time; am generally partial to Roger Cohen's work, because of the ideas and quality of the prose. Jamelle Bouie shows real promise here - it's the best piece I've read in quite some time.
5
You know things are messed up, when battle-field tactics are the best means to explain potential interactions between the congress and the president.
4
The more interesting analogy to the civil war is that during the civil war Lincoln suspended the constitutional mandate the the government show cause before detaining or arresting someone (habeas corpus).
The Supreme Court held that Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus was illegal, but Lincoln ignored the Supreme Court.
President Jackson also ignored the Supreme Court famously telling the Chief Justice: “you made your decision, now enforce it!”
So Trump is not the first President to ignore the other co-equal branches of government. Many others have done it before him.
This is hardly the first “constructional crises” and it won’t be the last.
5
Constitutional Flaw; "co-equal" branches of the government. I've said it and I'll say it once again, the executive branch is an "administrative" branch. It must be held accountable to the "people's representatives". That cohort is the U.S. Congress. Congress holds the ultimate people power and should be in a constitutional position of holding the executive branch accountable. In a publicly held business, imagine Congress as the Board of Directors. The Chief Operation Officer of that business serves at the convenience of the Board and Investors [in this case taxpayers/citizens].
In other words, the Chief Executive should not be co-equal with the Board [Congress] and Congress is directly responsible to the voters. One can argue the Chief Executive is directly responsible as well via the election process. But we cannot afford to wait 4-8 years to rid our government of a despot. At least Congressional members can be censured or even removed from office by their cohorts. The Presidency should be constitutionally accountable to Congress...period.
5
I know people say Nancy Pelosi is a real social progressive. But now she seems to me like a rich San Francisco liberal who doesn't want her house messed up by guests who drink a little too much during a wine and cheese party. PLEASE, Nancy, COURAGE!
8
Analogizing the Democrats with McClellan is a long stretch. McClellan had much in common with trump- he was a narcissist but an anxious one- fearful that his amour-propre would suffer if he was defeated. Failure to win was less damaging to his self esteem than a loss so he constantly projected shadows of confederate strength that didn't exist to excuse inaction.
The Democrats are also fearful, and rightly so, of losing but they needn't imagine trump's strength on the issue of impeachment- they can measure it. They also know certain things as facts by this time. Trump's base will never desert him so he has a baked in vote in the 35-40% range. That means there is perhaps 20-30% of the electorate up for grabs. A good part of that percentage is constituted by people who either are Republican or have Republican sympathies and who will vote for trump unless given a good alternative and a good reason not to.
The Democrats cannot succeed with impeachment in the Senate so the entire exercise is futile to begin with if the goal is removing trump from office. I know that, the Democrats know that, trump knows that and the voters know that so the question then is why do it? The answer to that question in the minds of the voters who might vote for trump is the critical piece of information- is it a sincere desire to protect the integrity of the Constitution or is it political posturing? If they see the latter it is a winner for trump.
3
In the domestic fights, always Donald Trump takes the initiative till now.
I'm astonished by the comments of Mitch McConnell who pretty much said he would never permit the Senate to convict Trump, no matter how egregious his crimes. Really? Because I'd like to see Mitch put his money where his mouth is.
If Trump really is breaking the law then I'd like to see the Republicans reveal themselves as a lawless gang of thugs.
"Don't turn over that stone you won't like the look of the vermin hiding under there!" I say let's let them feel the sunlight & see if they can withstand it.
3
"There is the Mueller report, of course, which spells out his multiple attempts to obstruct justice."
So, what's the word on Mueller? Is he coming in to the House to more clearly explain all of the hints in his report?
Will Republicans get to ask questions? Maybe about FISA warrants and such?
You are right about one thing. Nancy Pelosi has to fish or cut bait. All of those newly elected House Democrats don't have much to show for that $140K they collected. Starting impeachment, hoping something incriminating falls into Nadler's lap versus, getting something meaningful done, is a no brainer.
Try these on for 2020.
"We almost impeached Trump."
Your healthcare is getting better. It just needs time to recover. Re-elect me."
Your Social Security. If you die now, you won't be disappointed."
Yeah, you should go with the impeachment thing.
2
The impeachment advocates on this page are not addressing one of Nancy Pelosi's key concerns: what happens in 2020 to the 40 or so moderate Democrats who won house seats from Republicans in 2018 in the event of an impeachment. Many of them won by razor thin margins. None of them won by promising to impeach Donald Trump. Will they be re-elected if they vote for impeachment. Indeed, given their political vulnerability, will they even vote for impeachment? If they don't vote for impeachment Nancy Pelosi will suffer a major political defeat. If they do vote for impeachment and are defeated in a GOP sweep then the Democrats will again be powerless in Washington. Given that 1) we know the Senate will NEVER convict Donald Trump and 2) by all accounts the electorate views impeachment as a low priority item, is pressing forward with impeachment worth risking the house majority and with it the only leverage the Democrats have in Washington?
5
Democrats assumed the 2018 wave election would immediately lead to oversight hearings and eventually a damning Mueller report.
Trump and his enablers have done their best to neutralize both factors. They have the bully pulpit and have used maneuvers beyond the usual legal bounds. Unprecedented obstruction coupled with misrepresentations and outright lies have, so far, staved off the worse.
But Dems have the constitution and the facts on their side. Mueller's report alone details impeachable offenses. Trump is also individual 1 in felony election fraud, and he has additional exposure in his corrupt foundation, inauguration committee, and outstanding federal cases still under investigation or soon to go to trial.
Subpoenas have been issued and the courts will soon be examining whether Trump is entitled to operate an imperial presidency unaccountable to Congress. The destination isn't much in question, but the pace is much slower than hoped after this congress was seated.
But once documents are obtained and public hearings with Mueller, McGahn, Rosenstein, Don Jr, etc get underway, the public mood will shift more and more dramatically. Then the questions will be directed at Congressional Republicans and their tolerance for obvious criminality and unfitness.
Right now R's are whistling by the graveyard, just hoping bravado and misdirection will somehow get them by without accountability. But fundamentally they have a very weak hand.
2
Every obstructive action Trump takes without concrete counteractions by the Congress is a precedent leading towards more powerful Presidents. Trump and his Republican sycophants are damaging our Republic irrevocably.
I agree with Speaker Pelosi that it's not yet time to impeach. We must gather as much damning evidence as we can. Hopefully we can shame the R's into doing what even they must know is vital to the Republic.
Let's face it. Trump's base is in large part so bigoted that they'll never turn on him.
We must impeach! Then once he's out of office prosecute to the hilt.
1
Tempting analogy but not a good one. Here the ultimate winner is decided force of arms but by a stacked deck: a Republican Senate which no one, not even supporters of impeachment, contends has the slightest likelihood of convicting. The outcome of this battle is already decided. Why engage the enemy on a battlefield where he holds the high ground (the Constitutional process of trial by the Senate) and decisive numbers (a Republican majority that has already shown, absent John McCain and with Susan Collins’ Kavanaugh surrender, that it will hold firm)?
There are two ways to remove a president from office: one is impeachment, the other is by vote of the Electoral College. Impeachment, in this case, is emotionally indulgent political suicide.
4
Tenacity and belief in and espousing something easily expressed, like the rule of law. (But then need to clarify what is that rule for immigrants here without proper papers, but that is an entirely different issue . . .).
Going beyond a calculus that could prove wrong.
I am not a strong fan of impeachment, but if Trump and his cronies continue to deny information across the spectrum of requests, as seems to be what is in store, then the calculus must shift, and recognize that with clear, articulate, straightforward explanation of trump's wrongdoings and attempts thereof:
1. House Democrats voting for impeachment is justified;
2. Republican senators who deny the truth of the bases for impeachment, who echo witch hunt and that Democrats are unwilling to accept the 2016 outcome and all manner of other things not quite on point to the bases, might, at least in some districts, encounter strong headwinds in their next election. I can envision some amusing campaign ads detailing the wrongs and the senator voting against removal from office.
And those curiously neither strongly pro- nor anti-trump will have something to think about come 2020. The race will be at the margins, relying on these few in several states.
Of course if they listen primarily to Fox and like-ilk talk radio they are lost to the Democrats, because those organizations will twist it 180. But then those were probably lost already.
1
More than likely if he wins a second term— he will be impeached. He will leave the office either way setting up future presidents to push farther to the dark side.
Plus history will mark how he divided the country with the help of foreign adversaries.
1
@Christopher Diggs When will some people come to terms with the fact that a president has to do something seriously wrong to be impeached? (certainly to be convicted & removed). The President hasn't done anything wrong & should, imo, be given some leeway at the moment, seeing how for 2 yrs he has been falsely & viciously accused of something he didn't do or ever tried or wanted to do.
What has Trump done that has 'pushed to the dark side'? I'm curious to know.
You think Trump has divided the country? You don't think it was already divided well before Trump came along?
Why did BLM come about when Obama was president if it's only since Trump that we've been divided? The Tea Party formed under Obama's presidency. Trump maybe an incredible achiever but this would be stretching it a bit even for him. Was Trump really able to come along & divide 320 million citizens in a period of only months (I say months because things were like they are now almost right from the start of Trump's campaign). No man, no human being could manage to divide 320 million people in such short time.
You also say about help from foreign adversaries. What are you referring to, who are you referring to? Are you having difficulty dealing with the Mueller report maybe?
The Civil War is indeed the best comparison in American history to the present era but not in the way Bouie thinks. We are on a course to nationwide bloodshed, which is sure to begin the moment it appears Trump's presidency is ending. It is probably better to fight now than later, as Bouie says.
2
Democrats didn't mention Russia when they were home campaigning during the midterms. Because it wasn't important to their constituents. It's even less important now that the collusion charges have been put to rest by the Mueller report. (Obstruction is a new charge and not of great concern to Americans.)
3
The Civil War is not the right place to look for a lesson. Democrats surely remember what happened when the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton. Impeachment gained a majority vote in the House but lost in the Senate, where a two-thirds majority is required. Meanwhile, Clinton's approval ratings went up, and in the next election Republicans lost their majority in the House. Why start a fight you know you can't win?
5
Donald Trump is The Republican President. The Republicans are on a roll and they stand shoulder to shoulder solidly behind their Fearless Leader.
The Democrats cannot remove Trump from office without compelling evidence that Trump has personally committed high crimes. Compelling evidence that Trump has personally committed misdemeanors won't hack it. Compelling that his minions have committed treason while a smiling Trump looked on and tweeted approval won't cut it.
Even if the House passes Articles of Impeachment, McConnell may just dismiss them as nothing more than the Mueller Report that exonerated Trump. He could refuse to bring impeachment to the floor the Senate just as he refused to bring the nomination of Merrick Garland to the floor of the Senate stating that the impeachment case is a matter for voters to decide. Democrats could scream and holler but their Articles of Impeachment would never even get a hearing.
In order to break Republican unity and remove Trump, Democrats would need compelling evidence that could be publicly disclosed before the impeachment resolution is passed. That is how Nixon was removed from office.
Mr. Bouie's military analogies fail. Military campaigns succeed because by meeting the enemy with overwhelming strength. While Trump's conduct is worrisome and Senate Republicans may be just summer soldiers, the strength of the evidence disclosed to date is not overwhelming.
1
I hope Ms. P reads this, well done.
I agree 100%, impeach Trump his base is more or less a constant.
The democratic base needs inspiration; they won't get that from anything other than impeachment. Do the right thing call the bully out.
1
Democrats need to impeach this president first.
Even if the Senate refuses to take out the garbage, Democrats can then remind the electorate that following several recent Republican administrations they were voted into office and restored economic stability.
This time they can run on maintaining economic stability, renewed adherence to the Constitution, AND restoring the nation's sanity.
2
At this point not even Trump really matters anymore. The court has been successfully acquired by Mitch McConnell, as we saw today, and there is nothing that anybody can do about it. Holler about Trump until the cows come home—the damage has been done.
5
@Jamelle
Over 65% of US Citizens are unable to locate "Canada" on a world map... Now you expect them to learn from Civil War history?
Good Luck!
2
Where is Charlie Blow - I miss his thoughtful balanced analysis ..
1
McClellan's Peninsula Campaign is an unsuitable analogy for the Democrats and impeachment.
The problem for the Democrats in Congress is not "uncertainty" about what would happen if they initiated impeachment proceedings or some "cowardly" overestimation of the opposing side. We know exactly how many Republicans are in the Senate (a majority) and we know exactly how they would vote (to acquit, just as they have voted to support Trump up until now).
So the military analogy of initiating impeachment would be the Charge of the Light Brigade or Pickett's Charge. It is guaranteed defeat. Guaranteed. What makes anyone think that the Republican Senate would suddenly turn on Trump?
3
Well put. Democrats who want to preach about holding the moral high ground but not act upon it do not deserve leadership. Leadership means doing the right thing even when it might not be popular. Usually in the long run, having done the right thing will also prove to eventually be the popular thing.
Get rid of the cancer in our polity.
1
I know that impeachment would be terrible. I have come to the realization that he must be impeached in order to protect our institutions and the rule of law. We are in a Constitutional crisis.
1
If the House fails to impeach, it will be responsible for enabling Trump. If it does impeach and the Senate fails to convict, the Senate alone will bear this burden. The House is NOT responsible for the Senate does or fails to do.
While removing Trump would be the big prize for the Dems, burdening the Senate with the sole responsibility for keeping him in power will be a win in itself. But if the Dems fail to impeach they will win nothing at all; they will just make a sitting duck of their party for Trump, McConnell and the alt-right to shoot at leisure.
3
It's a nice analogy, but I'm not sure it was necessary to make the point, nor better than another analogy.
Here's the deal, Democrates are as scared as ever of making sure they win an election. Last round, I'd argue, that the Kavanaugh approval angered the Dems more than reinforced the Republicans, and ended up swaying the elections even more in favor of the left.
I don't necessarily agree with it, but Pelosi does have a point...you want one thing that will rally the right, and it's impeachment of their guy. They'll use it to say, "See, the Democrats can't win an election so they will try to steal it." Does that mean Trump shouldn't be impeached? Nope. But I'd argue if you want an impeachment to work, you're going to need across the aisle help.
And without that an impeachment will both fail, and fuel the right. You don't even need a lot of Republicans to join you, just a few, enough to make the case to the middle in this country that they see you as being bi-partisan.
This is not about the hard liners. They're going to hate and vote against the other party no matter what. This is about the unifiers in this country, which I believe are the majority.
1
History by use of analogy is always a dangerous method. This illustrates why. McClellan is to blame because he gave up the chance for decisive victory. Bulling ahead with impeachment is not a strategy for victory, unless your definition of victory is to make a grand, futile and stupid gesture. Trump will not be removed from office by congressional vote. The public is not going to swing wildly in favor of it, the Republican senators will not jump on board. Heck, Mitch McConnell would never even allow a trial to happen unless he thinks it will hurt the Democrats in 2020!
Build the case against Donald Trump (including more investigations) and then take the case to the American people in November 2020. Not only is this the way to remove him from office, but it is even more legitimate than action by Congress.
And, please, don't confuse wise leadership, as we see from people like Pelosi, with cowardice. Thank the heavens we have here leading the House!
3
Since Trump began to run, we all have become political strategists—to our detriment, since most of us are not. My fellow liberals, while I am incredibly proud of all that we have done in resistance, catch the whiff of election and begin the same problematic chant: be realistic, this action/person will not beat Trump so even if it violates our principles, our ideals and our constitution, we should strategically hang back.
The truth is, there is no playing our cards right. There is no strategy when one side wants to change the game completely. We don’t know what’s going to happen, but I think we are all rightly terrified that Trump will be elected again.
I for one am tired of politics and strategy. I think impeachment should be introduced because he is violating the checks and balances of our country, because he is uprooting our foundation and our constitution. This is the situation when impeachment is introduced. I don’t know whether or not he’ll be kicked out of the office, but hopefully he’ll leave one day. And when that happens, I want to know that along the way, the rest of the country stood up for our country, had faith in our country and its foundations. Otherwise, Trump and his base have already done what I believe they intended to do: destroy our democracy.
What do we stand for?
1
Looking at the recommended comments, readers and the editorial board appear to miss something. Democrats are stalling for time. They want Mueller to clear them of political liability before impeaching. Out source the responsibility. Leave your options open.
Nancy Pelosi is speaking in a half-truth when she says Trump is goading them. He is goading them. However, he is only goading them to do something earlier than they would like to do it. Democrats want the evidence presented to the public first. Trump is refusing. That way he can claim an acquital as exoneration if the Democrats move to impeach.
We can assume McConnell will cooperate. Therefore, Trump cannot be convicted under any circumstances. What we therefore need right now is a leader who will make the argument to impeach even when defeat is almost certainly inevitable. We need to make clear that impeachment is guilt even without removal. Nancy Pelosi sure doesn't fit the description.
1
Charles Blow and Jamelle Boule get it. It's not hard to see this. What is wrong with the Democratic leadership? Where is Julius Caesar the army commander (not the dictator) when we need him?
2
I am on the fence regarding Trump's impeachment. The country--indeed the planet--will be better off the sooner he is out of power. But we know the Senate will not vote for impeachment, so this may be a counterproductive move. Here is my main point: The Democrats have much in their favor, with abundant evidence of obstruction of justice and most Americans regarding Trump unfavorably. However, the Democrats lack one element of Trump's strength: a solid, unwavering core of supporters who are loyal to this man and no other. It may be only 42 percent but it is locked in place. We Democrats have yet to decide who our candidate will be. That puts us at a disadvantage. But as the trade war with China escalates, and more is learned about Trump's lifetime of corruption, that may be changing. A little slippage of support for Trump among Republicans in the Congress and the public could shift the advantage to the Democrats in their fight to save American democracy.
The first step should be to get Mueller and his team to testify asap. And he needs to be asked, if the president were not the president, would he have indicted based on the evidence he found. That same question needs to be asked of all the attorneys who worked on the case. It needs to be clear as day that the president committed felonies and that if it were you or I who did that, we'd be facing a trial and prison if convicted. Mueller and his attorney's words will mean more to the country than anything else because the country trusts him over the AG and all other politicians to tell us the truth. Subpoena him and his team today.
3
Bouie's civic war lesson is that sometimes it pays to be aggressive, but sometimes it doesn't, e.g., Napoleon at Waterloo. Neither war time experience is a guide to the Trump dilemma. Bouie cites Trump's 42% approval rating but he fails to mention that the majority of voters are not in favor of impeachment (NY Times readers notwithstanding) and that without substantial bipartisan support, the effort would fail in the Senate and almost surely alienate many voters who are unsure about Trump. It is a serious business to remove a sitting president.....it has never been done.........and it should only be attempted when both Houses and the public support it, especially when the electorate can exercise its will in 18 months.
1
Last week, the May Reuter’s Ipsos poll found 45% of a national sample in favor of impeaching Trump, up from 40% a month ago. For a point of comparison, 39% favored impeaching Nixon at the start of House impeachment hearings. Seems the only thing Democrat’s have to fear is their own timidity, because a quantitative view of the matter gives impeachment hearings a green light.
3
@dt Democrats held a majority in both the House and the Senate during Watergate. The Senate was dominated by Democrats. That is a critical difference. Impeachment would be counterproductive because it would not end, it cannot end, in conviction and removal of the president from office.
Nixon was not removed from office by impeachment; he resigned. Clinton was impeached and convicted. He was not removed from office. Impeachment will not result in conviction, to say nothing of removal from office. Such a futile gesture simply hands the victory of "exoneration" to Trump again.
This failed, purely symbolic impeachment effort is the shortest and surest routed to a second Trump term. It makes no sense at all.
1
@dt Should our political Parties be guided by opinion polls, is that a good idea? I admit that 45% is a high number, an unbelievable number to be honest if you take into account how the President has just been proven right in regard to the allegation of 'Russian collusion'.
How much of that 45% figure is down to MSM & their fanatical behaviour toward dragging the President's name through the mud, how much damage has the collusion hoax done to Trump?
On the other hand, Trump's approval rating hit 46% last week, two points higher than Obama at the equivalent time in his presidency. Personally speaking I don't put much stock in polls, good or bad.
Impeachment: I really don't understand the point of even considering it, unless the Dems want to impeach Trump merely for a bit of grandstanding, in the hope it might damage him in the 2020 election. We all know impeachment would have zero chance of success. 67 votes in the Senate needed to convict & remove, that means the 47 Democrats would need a min of 20 GOP Senators to convict a Republican president. There's more chance of hell freezing over.
So, just why would a Party impeach a president when they know it has zero chance of actually changing anything?
1
I agree with Mr. Bouie. If he's Trump is not impeached, it will only embolden him more. History demands it. Otherwise the constitution really is just a slip of paper. Detractors fear impeachment will allow him to play the victim card and cruise to victory in 2020 because he beat the rap. Maybe. But inaction holds far more dire consequences for the future. If a President brazenly obstructs justice - the Congress must act as the check.
4
Many Democratic leaders were in Congress when Gingrich led the impeachment attack on Clinton. It backfired on him. That is the lesson Pelosi remembers vividly.
What is forgotten is that the public never felt that lying about a sexual relationship with a young and consenting woman was worth the effort to unseat him. It was tawdry, but common. The mood in the country was "slap him on the wrist and get it over with".
Trump's situation is entirely different. If there was "no collusion" it wasn't from lack of interest, just incompetence. As for obstruction, it is on steroids.
The country's mood is different. This is a widely disliked man, and people are fed up with the way the country is going.
To view the present from the frame of 1998 is a mistake. Trump thinks impeachment would work for him, but he is no Clinton.
Trump's actions cannot be ignored. Just do it. Focus on winning the senate and let the chips fall where they may. Trump cannot be above the law. To allow that is to abandon democracy itself.
2
Insightful, clear, and timely piece...very much appreciated. Only over this spring have I become convinced that he must be impeached. A recent opinion by Rice, cogent though not exactly revelatory, amplified by Trump’s meeting with Orban make anything else indefensible. Pelosi is on the firing line, and at every possible juncture Trump is daring her to act. Nothing he does, literally nothing, amounts to more than a compulsive need to reassure his base by way of open disruption and disrespect. If Pelosi can anticipate and lead decisively- a very tall order given the vanity and inexperience of her colleagues, democracy, not just the balance and separation of powers, stands a chance in 2020.
1
Many ethical and moral Republicans would not regret replacing erratic, immoral, dangerous Trump with a religious real conservative Pence, but some Democrats are worried that Pence would be more regressive and effective than the devil we know.
Republicans have quietly blocked most of Trump's crazy ideas, including repealing Obamacare, trade wars, the Wall, and foreign policy. All they want is less taxes, less regulations, more conservative judges, gerrymandering, corruption, and winning elections.
2
Trump would impeach in a hair's breath. And enough with subpoenas. Arrest them as you would any citizen ignoring congress.
7
I don't care if impeachment "galvanizes" Trump's base.
Impeachment will also rally Democrats and Independents to help rid our country of Trump and his lies and chaos.
We don't need to wait until Trump has bankrupted us.
Or dragged us into a war with his non-stop threats.
Or declared himself king.
3
Sure, the eggheads, even many Republican ones, think Trump is a serious threat to our democracy, but the Senate will not convict Trump because they fear that convicting him will shut them out of government for a generation or more and their oligarchs will turn on them.. Trump is doing a good job of destroying himself (the market's drop today is just a start - wait until the notes from excessive borrowing throughout the economy start going into default). Conducting a Senate hearing in the middle of a campaign will give him total control of the election narrative. The eggheads think he is stupid. Well, he is, but he is smarter than most at rallying know-nothings to his cause. The Democrats can control the situation better from the campaign trail. This conclusion is due to my belief at this time that Trump would not be convicted.
1
@Mister Ed
Thank you for your horse sense, Mister Ed. Removal of Trump from office has to be the goal for citizens alarmed and outraged by the president's corrupt behavior. Unfortunately, impeachment will not lead to removal from office.
Investigations of Trump's actions and of those of his cronies, publication of tax and financial records, more revelations about obstruction of justice, and (as you state) Trump's disastrous legislative and trade record--these will chip away at his strength at the ballot box. But unless Trump is voted out in 2020, Republicans in Congress will continue to defend and support him.
Impeachment has never led to removal from office. Getting Trump out of office has to be our goal. Effective politics and a strong candidate in 2020 is the only way to remove Trump.
Send the Capitol police to arrest those who refuse to appear under subpoena. You can just break the law with impunity now? What the hell is this nonsense? Impeach this president. Enough is enough.
8
Trump will not be convicted in an impeachment proceeding because Republican senators will not vote to convict. So impeachment is not a means of getting Trump out of office.
The failure to convict Trump would only enhance Trump's standing. Why do people want to do that? We need to investigate him and his appointees for corruption, but as long as impeachment leads to acquittal--which it does--it would be stupid to embark upon it.
2
The Times needs a like, dislike option for articles. This would enable one to express their opinion with out the time and care it would take to write a comment. This would also help the Times with evaluation of its content. Feed back like this is what empires are made of. I liked this article for the record.
1
@clif howell Should they do the same for comments?
2
@José Franco
I thought about how great that would be, a "dislike" option for comments. And then I realized that if I couldn't articulate why I disliked a comment, I was just being lazy.
But then I went down a rabbit hole thinking that the "like" option is similarly lazy...
Argh. The mind boggles.
2
Recent experience in Wisconsin showed that a divisive Governor, with strong, vocal opposition aligned against him, could not be removed by a recall election, analogous to impeachment by referendum. The "Center" (aka those not as politically engaged) were put off by the harping and screeching of both sides, and fell back on the idea that the guy won the election (which, yes, was influenced by ominous outside forces, aka the Koch Brothers), so let him serve and beat him next time. And they were so put off that Scott Walker not only won the recall, but also the next election.
The worst thing you can do to Trump is ignore him. Let Nancy lead the House to a series of victories on health care, infrastructure, and education, and when they are blocked in the Senate and/or by this compromised President, Democrats can present a stark, compelling choice in 2020.
6
I haven’t had a chance to read the 300+ comments, and maybe someone has noted my point already, but Lincoln fired McClellan because the General did not display leadership in battle. He did not take decisive action. I highly recommend Doris Kearns Goodwin’s discussion of this in her recent book, “Leadership,” where she profiles four Presidents, including Lincoln, who took decisive leadership in the face of strong opposition.
In comparison to these strong leaders, Trump, all bluster and ego and no care whatsoever for the good of the country, is a timid mouse. He can’t even fire anyone directly. I remember how stunned I was when he sent his former bouncer/bodyguard Keith Schiller with a letter to fire James Comey when Comey was visiting the FBI in California. That about sums up Trump for me.
1
Alas we have no Lincoln, no Sherman, no Grant
1
I'm with Lincoln. Step up, Democratic leadership - you must act! Not to initiate articles of impeachment, with a finger to the wind for any reason, is to abandon principle and duty for expedience sake. A poor way to run a country, I would say.
1
What Democrats can learn from McClellan is don't be timid and overthink. If Trump is hoping for impeachment as part of some grand political strategy, that's a bad move. Impeachment inquiries can be unpredictable and difficult to control, like war.
4
Depending on who you talk to, what will make America great again varies. Democrats in particular, have to do a better job of defining their unified message/s. Unequal results of human achievement conjure up simplistic notions of injustice for Democrats. Members of "The Blue Party" most often learn these harsh truths through self discovery in the pursuit of relative financial sustainability or while soliciting project funding and or grants. Unfortunately, prior to self discovery, human impulse is generally towards chasing a vision (ideal) of equality or generosity. Equality is as undesirable as it is unrealizable. Attempting to achieve equality requires that each of us forego who we are and what we can do in order to create something in which no one ultimately believes - a society everybody is the same or has the same. Acknowledging and/or recognizing we have to proceed knowing to increase opportunities for all is likely to favor those better able to take advantage of them and may often first increase inequalities. I'd like to see Democrats proactively acknowledge this reality while advocating for altruistic policies that are based on timely empirical data provided by groups/parties/individuals who'll have skin in the game. Let's proactively make equality of opportunity for self-interested rational persons behind the veil of ignorance better since perfection isn't realistic.
2
The historical analogy is, to say the least, a bit of a stretch, but I'm glad Mr. Bouie is reading history. The point to remember is that impeachment will lead nowhere, as long as Republicans control the Senate. Remember, these are the Republicans who have no priority greater than pleasing President Trump. Therefore, while it is important for the Democrats to be aggressive in exercising their oversight powers, calling it "impeachment" is just a word game--and one that might play into Trump's hands. Get going on the oversight; the name of the game can be changed later on if that looks advantageous.
1
@CitizenJ Impeachment will not be successful in the Republican Senate, but impeachment is harder to resist than oversight. Impeachment hearings and discovery will inform the public and it will be harder for Republican senators to stand by him.
And Democrats can say, at the end of the hearings when Trump is fully exposed, that they do not have the Senate votes at this time, so they are suspending their efforts for now.
1
@Paul Brown
There is no evidence to suggest that "impeachment is harder to resist than oversight." Many, many horrendous revelations of criminal behavior have been published--most of them coming directly out of the president's mouth or his twitter account--and they have failed to weaken Trump politically.
I am old enough to have listened to the Watergate hearings on the radio as my family traveled on summer vacation. That captive audience for months of Congressional hearings ceased to exist long, long ago. It had changed even by the time Clinton was impeached, and he and his party survived impeachment very nicely. In fact, the Democrats benefited from it.
Impeachment could have the effect of shutting down much-needed Congressional investigations into wrongdoing by Trump and his appointees; Trump's acquittal by the Senate (which is guaranteed) would be one more case of "exoneration" and proof that Democrat-led investigations in Congress are driven not by duty but by political partisanship.
1
@Michelle
Thanks, Michelle. I, too, remember Watergate.
As those investigations continued to produce incriminating evidence, and as Nixon weaseled to escape discovery, he continued to lose support from the public and consequently from the Congress. Most people simply got fed up with him, his personality and his machinations.
Faced with that reality, Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment.
I can imagine something like that happening now, but even a resignation wouldn't stop the investigations, and Trump would lose the protection of his office. And if Pence would pardon Trump and his family, that would be extremely unpopular and still wouldn't stop the investigations, the civil suits and the criminal pursuits in other jurisdictions.
The thing to remember is that impeachment is impossible for a popular president, but easy for an unpopular one. The investigations will make Trump more unpopular as more information comes out.
Also, I don't see why impeachment inquiries would shut down any other congressional investigations.
1
At the end of however much time he has left, Mr. Trump's one sure accomplishment will be to have damaged severely both of the two parties of our discredited two-party system. The Republicans have been exposed as standing for nothing other than their own personal careers, and the Democrats have been exposed as utterly feckless servants of the bankers and other manipulators of money--too timid to act for the common good.
Perhaps we should thank Mr. Trump for this accomplishment. To have exposed the entire political class as a pack of would-be emperors wearing no clothes is quite an accomplishment. Who would have thought he had it in him?
1
Insightful and penetrating look at turning points in the Civil War that parallel current day political challenges, pointing out the similarities and peril. One of more fascinating analyses I've read. Grateful to Mr. Bouie's for his well-researched scholarship and thoughtful perspective about how to apply the lessons of history to our current political situation. This column is a clarion call which I hope leads to principled actions to deal with the treat in the WH.
1
Local elected officials can be recalled if enough citizens petition for a recall election and vote to remove them from office. Maybe it's time to make that apply to national elected officials. That way, it's "the people's will," not partisan politics.
Like the Confederates discussed in the piece, Trump grows stronger with ever inaction. History shows us that a a power mad authoritarian like Trump gains in strength every time he gets away with some new breach of the rule of law. Each time new evidence is revealed and Trump thumbs his nose with impunity, he only gets stronger. Just look what he's done and where were at. It's time to vigorously fight back in the name of America.
6
@Henry Crawford We have to make sure to vote!
Mr. Bouie,
Your comments and historical parralels are spot on! Thank you for spelling out all of this and keep doing it.
4
I totally agree.
1
Well written and concluded column. Totally agree. They need to find their confidence and not be so fearful of doing the right and just thing, which is impeachment. I wish the press would give the dems much more airtime and press time to state their case then giving the one breaking the law, Trump, all of the press. The majority of this country is with the dems and the rule of law. Foward, march!
1
Impeaching the president is meant to be a tool that leads to his removal from office. There is almost no chance that the US Senate would vote to convict him, and thus actually remove him, so impeachment would just be symbolic. Impeachment proceedings would also a major distraction just as Democratic presidential candidates gear up to make the case to voters that one of them should replace him in a year and a half. I care far more about him being removed from office than a symbolic gesture, so I side with Pelosi on this one.
Even if there is just a minuscule chance that impeaching him would strengthen him going into the 2020 campaign, it's really not worth it. He won't be removed from office by any other means than defeat at the ballot box. And should he be re-elected after being impeached, then the Democrats would have rendered impeachment a useless tool in combating him in the future.
You know, it’s not an accident that the loudest chest-thumpers and biggest sneerers at Nancy Pelosi just happen to be guys. Just as it wasn’t an accident that a whole bunch of the guy-devotees of St. Bernie had a real...uh, thing about Hillary Clinton.
Ordinarily, I’d suggest that you boys might want to think a little about what you have in common with Trump by way of your ‘tude towards women. But in this case, it’s interesting. Trump doesn’t fool with Speaker Pelosi all that much.
I think it’s because he’s afraid of her. Maybe think about what that means?
But since we’re on the Civil War, here’s a little blast from the past. Grant was unlike McClellan because he didn’t posture, didn’t brag, didn’t send glowing telegrams of self-praise home, didn’t attack his own people, didn’t play politics to advance himself, and didn’t promise the moon that he couldn’t get just to make a pretty show.
He was pretty honest about where the fight really was, too, but mostly what he did was bite down on that cigar, ride to the sound of the guns, dig in, grab goodhold, and hold on. If he won, he pushed. If he lost, he got out. And he waited for his time, and then he MOVED.
Gimme Grant and Speaker Nancy, any old day.
5
The best argument for impeachment is that it will require TELEVISED HEARINGS. Every day, on CNN, C-SPAN, and who knows what else, documents, witnesses, evidence, can be put forth in front of the American people instead of behind Robert Mueller's closed doors to show exactly the extend of Trump's cooperation with a foreign enemy and his incompetent, but nevertheless intentional obstruction of justice.
And that most likely the tip of the Iceberg.
He doesn't have to be impeached, but the evidence can be built up for him to struggle against it all in 2020.
10
Absolutely great column!!
3
The Dems have an advantage, but only in the House. They can impeach, but are not Constitutionally empowered to convict, and thus remove the President. The most sure means of removal is through the ballot, which, additionally, will no doubt happen more quickly as well.
The true imperative now is to strengthen the political case against Trump and win big in 2020, hopefully while strengthening the House majority and winning enough Senate seats to flip it as well. As they build their campaign, the Dems need to focus on issues that matter to voters, not issues that matter to political junkies. They also need to prepare for the R’s to play dirty, which they almost certainly will do, and they need to not let Trump goad them into battles that weaken them and appeal to his base:
- Health care for all matters more than Medicare for all, and the ACA is the basis for winning this battle.
- Making college (and a college loan) affordable, not making it free.
- Using the market to encourage the development of technologies that reduce carbon and mitigate climate change is a winning issue, so don’t let Trump make it sound like it is not feasible.
- Border security is, in fact important, but our country is not full yet, so let’s do smart immigration reform.
There are lots of Dem candidates, so let’s use the primaries to focus on the winning issues and become an indicator of a strong Dem candidate who will convincingly beat Trump.
1
@Marshall Doris I'd add to your list a respectable non partisan economists who can explain to the lay person how all of this is going to be paid for. These altruistic policies should be based on empirical data from parties with skin in the game.
Mr. Bouie has it right.
Nancy Pelosi deserves enormous credit for making the Affordable Care Act a reality. But her fear of starting the impeachment process is a daily gift to Donald Trump.
1
BRAVO! Say it until we're blue in the face.
1
like mccellan, the democrats have everything going for them and frankly if they can't beat the most heinous president in history they don't belong in power. skip the impeachment and focus on policies that can unite, not divide. mccellan was too cautious, being too aggressive policy-wise will cost the democrats this election war.
1
That impeachment will galvanize Donald Trump's base is a bogus caution! It is calculated to resist impeachment proceedings, which, in fact, will demonstrate to the American people exactly what a corrupt and criminal person is Donald Trump and how he is destroying our democracy. If he succeeds it will be ourselves to blame!
8
The machinery of impeachment . . is already churning.
Jamelle Bouie is right- impeachment is rare in history.
However, I don't think Jamelle was an adult in the Watergate era. I'm not pulling rank- but I do think it might be hard for him, not having lived through it, to see how the inertia of vengeance will follow crimes as spectacular and self-serving as Nixon's (and Trump's) until they are paid for, once and for all.
It might have been Rod Rosenstein's fear of being implicated in the firing of James Comey that led to the appointment of Robert Mueller. And such a sequence of events might very well seem utterly random to us.
But crimes of this magnitude have a way of exposing themselves, all on their own.
As Shakespeare said,
"It will have blood, they say. Blood will have blood.
Stones have been known to move, and trees to speak.
Augurs and understood relations have
By magot pies and choughs and rooks brought forth
The secret’st man of blood."
2
I'm reminded of the Kenny Rogers song that has the lines -
"...You got to know when to hold 'em,
Know when to fold 'em",
Know when to walk away,
And know when to run..."
Seems to me the Dems are in the position of holding 'em right about now. Just sitting here wishing and waiting for them to throw their cards down on the table... sigh.
1
Interesting column. I suggest a different interpretation. Whereas in the Civil War the citizens of the US literally took up arms against one another, in the current day, both "sides," Republican and Democrat, have the responsibility of working for the good of the country, not for defeating the other party or leader. Doubtless, the two parties will often come to very different conclusions about the right course, but the goals should be the same: to work for the good of the country. In that vein, any action that Congress takes should put the country first, rather than having as the primary goal the defeat or harm of the president.
In other words: how does access to Trump's tax returns help the country? Further, where does having Barr or Mueller testify fit in to the legislative priorities which actually matter to Americans?
@Robert, it matters if our president is a felon. It matters if the senate is ignoring the law and the AG thinks he is above the law. You may not care if the president is a crook, but most of us do care and want it addressed asap. This is a fight to keep our democracy from authoritarian rule. Congress is an equal branch of gov't, and Trump is completely abusing his power.
@Robert Check out Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. Start with Thoreau's civil disobedience. FYI Both Thoreau and Trump avoided paying taxes. (Thoreau's aunt paid his taxes without his knowledge) Trump knows what he's doing, he'll either continue to distract Democrats from creating policies which his base loves and finds Democrats policies to be counter productive/waste of money or Trump will encourage the largest voter turnout of Democrats in 2020.
We keep forgetting about the trial in the Senate that would follow impeachment.
Even if the President is not removed because of the Senate's GOP majority, we cannot discount the impact that a six-week, televised Senate trial would have in making plain for all to see the facts concerning this President's corruption and lawlessness. Impeach and make the Republican Senators vote to acquit (and then defend their votes in their reelection campaigns).
The President is not the one holding the strong hand in this game. Speaker Pelosi should call his bluff.
6
@Blue State
Exactly. Impeachment is not just about removing Trump. It's about laying out evidence of Trump's corruption in a public trial and forcing the Republican Party to prove its own corruption by voting against removal.
I question the McClellan example that Mr. Bouie cites.
Lincoln and McClellan weren’t exactly strangers, Before the war McClellan had been a railroad president, Lincoln employed by him to represent his company in several court cases. McClellan was Lincoln’s boss.
Did their prior relationship affect their subsequent one when the roles were reversed? You betch’ya.
President Lincoln could have fired Gen. McClellan at any time and ultimately did. His problem was finding a competent replacement. Here, he was crippled by a dearth of experience at the corps and army command-level. No one had commanded an army in the field much larger than a few regiments. Washington’s army is typical of that period. Although its numbers fluctuated wildly, on average it mustered about 7,000 men — or as few as 2,500. Suddenly, armies the size of any Napoleon commanded materialized. These had to be led and were, but nobody knew how to run them administratively. Lost, misunderstood and poorly executed orders were common occurrences on both sides
Many of McClellan’s operational problems lay in the uneven quality of subordinate generals. That, coupled with the highly politicized nature of the officer corps itself made him hesitant to use it as aggressively as Lincoln wanted.
You may want to revisit the 'received wisdom' about Gen. McClellan. You may have read or seen several of the histories I did. They all echo a 'standard' story about a self-infatuated great organizer who was ineffective in combat. In doing do, they also echo his political opponents. He ran against Lincoln in 1864.
Here are a few points they re-spin or overlook completely: He was the Only general ever to defeat Lee in a major battle when Lee had superior forces, at Malvern Hill. He was loved by his officers and troops, as when he replaced Pope after 2nd Bull Run. He won part of the campaign at Harper's Ferry (12,500 Union captured), and then forced Lee back into VA, albeit losing a strong chance to deal Lee a major defeat at Antietam. In doing so he may have saved a deeper invasion or even moves against D.C.
When we see the victories by Meade and Grant later, we tend to assume that the battle-hardened Union army of 1863-65 was the same fighting quality as the army that had been defeated by weaker forced at Ball's Bluff and 1st Bull Run in 1861. It was not. Mac's sub-commanders and troops were better organized next spring, but hardly battle tested, as the army had been expanded with raw recruits. If he was cautious, it was because he understood from 1st Bull Run and Jackson's Valley campaign what ill-planned attacks could cost the attackers.
1
Like most everything else associated with this president, impeachment is a slippery slope.
Not so much because it will divide the country between those who blindly support him and those who don't. because it's been that way ever since he got into the White House.
What's of more significance here is that very laws upon which the United States was founded are now being challenged and undermined by the very one whose sole job is to preserve, protect and defend them.
That Donald Trump holds himself above the law and beyond reproach is nothing new.
His wealth has awarded him a lifetime of great privilege as well as the opportunity to get away with things most mere mortals would be sternly penalized for.
And therein lies the main problem.
Armed with a belief in his own invincibility, Trump has now embarked on not only re-making the Republican party in his own image, but this country as well -- And no doubt he would like nothing more than the ensuing chaos over his impeachment process in order solidify both his position, and his base.
It will take a lot not to take the bait.
But that's exactly what's called for now.
The only thing that will show Trump where he truly stands with the majority of the American people, is to soundly vote him out of office in 2020.
Now is the time to speak softly -- and carry a big stick.
1
This article, many others that I've read, and the comments from many people seem to make an assumption that I think is unwarranted. The assumption seems to be that Trump must be impeached/removed before the 2020 election, or never. This makes no sense to me. The impeachable offenses he has committed to date are still valid subjects of impeachment in 2021, should he win re-election.
If the strategy of beating him by a large enough vote/EC margin that he cannot successfully question the legitimacy of the vote, then go after him for impeachment in his second term. Then there really is not a downside, because he can't be reelected. In addition, with a year and half of him continuing to do "self-impeaching" actions, and the unusual arrangement of which party has to defend the most Senate seats (in this case the Republicans are defending some 20+ of the 33 seats up), there is a good likelihood that the Senate may flip. This removes McConnell as the obstructionist, and changes the game in terms of actual conviction.
There is also the growing evidence of Trump's advancing mental decline. His worsening ability to speak/think coherently, his paranoia, his inability to compartmentalize in order to actually accomplish anything, his easy distraction into irrelevant things, all point to man who in 18 months will be likely incapable of presenting an image of mental competence when facing a Democratic challenger in debates. This is another big piece of baggage for him.
3
Thank you Mr. Bouie. Indeed, we need a spine now. Your analogy is precision.
2
@Alan in Amsterdam
Alan, let me suggest that Democrats need more repetition.
Trump repeats himself, but Democrats and critics don't.
Instead, Democrats ramble on and they are forgotten!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Trump's use of the OK sign with his right hand.
Democrats can tease Trump with OK signs on both hands:
OK - OK!
Message: Trump is NOT OK, NOT OK!
----------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, Democrats tend to ramble on and on.
If they would repeat themselves often it might stick.
OK - OK ?
Terrific way of looking at the current situation. When it was first reported (in February this year I think) that the Democratic majority House could subpoena Trump's tax records, my immediate question was 'Why haven't they already done it?' The subpoenas should've gone out the day the new Congress was sworn in. The GOP and Trump won elections because they're blocking people from voting and because they make people afraid, but mostly because the Democrats haven't stepped up and defeated them. This is why people like Rep Ocasio Cortez and Sen. Harris are such breaths of fresh air.
1
They also won because for all the posturing, WE didn’t show up and WE did...not...vote.
What we did do, was chew on our own arm.
The tactical delay by the Democrats in drafting/proposing articles of Impeachment is really cowardice. Democrats, fearing the boogeyman of Trump name calling and other disparaging comments from his base, has overcome their senses. Even if the Senate would not act on the Articles, history (and voters hopefully will too) will note that the Democrats acted against an un-Constitutional - as evidence suggests - (and perhaps unhinged - as twitter has shown) President. That is better than history showing the Democrats talked but eventually sat on their hands while the abuse of power continued.
2
A mirror argument to Jamelle Bouie's could also be made — that where Democrats are timid, wary, and hesitant, the Republicans, especially Donald Trump, are brash, aggressive, and persistent.
This mirror argument also suggests are terribly important question: If Democrats do not take the high ground, go on the offensive, how far will Republicans take there strategy? Republican victories over Supreme Court nominees, the judiciary as a whole, and on a slew of policy matters suggest they could take it far. Moreover, while Democrats shy away from raising constitutional concerns, the Republicans have no qualms at all about suppressing votes, disenfranchising increasingly large segments of the population, appealing to racism, and ignoring constitutional checks and balances.
Indeed, Donald Trump has repeatedly labeled opponents and critics as "treasonous." That's an extraordinary claim. It reveals how he sees his status as president. And no Republican that I know of has challenged him on it. How far is Trump from asserting that he is the state?
1
Mr. Bouie, do you believe that McConnell would even bring an impeachment of Trump to the Senate floor? Or that if he does that 67 Senators would find their consciences long enough to convict? Then Trump would boast that it was all a "witch hunt", and his "base" would rally around him.
1
@Cassandra
Well, two wrongs don’t make a right, but first we need to hear from Mueller.
@Cassandra, his base will rally round him no matter what. The effect on his base is in no way an argument against impeachment.
1
Just what’s needed, another example of frustrating situations. Why not just tell us what can be done with estimated timeline. Sort of a put up or shut up plea.
First they need to haul Mueller in there!
1
If you consistently send a wishy washy message about whether or not to impeach, a majority of voters will think the facts are not sound. But it's pretty clear he has committed many impeachable acts. Pelosi has been superb....time for her to get tough and go down in history as an American hero!!!
3
How many divisions do Democrats command? This fight will not be won in the courts, at the polls or in an impeachment proceeding. Win or lose the 2020 election, it should be obvious by now that Trump has no intention of leaving the White House. If he does, he'll spend the rest of his life in jail. Democrats must come up with a plan of action to resist a defeated Trump who will still be constitutionally our commander-in-chief for 10 weeks or so after the election. Will our armed forces have a duty to carry out his orders? Will the Boeing executive who will be confirmed as our Secretary of Defense stand in Trump's way?
What happens if he alleges voter fraud? What if the Russians shut down hundreds of polling places, a tactic that helps him but hurts the Democratic candidate? If the media questions the election result, will he declare them all enemies of the people and shut them down?
In sum, it would be foolish to assume there will be a peaceful transfer of power if Trump loses. He would rather destroy our country than go to prison. Full stop.
2
The right way is to hold hearings, gather data, and subpoena to force cooperation. Then write articles of impeachment. After exhausting all methods to compel cooperation, failure to cooperate with constitutional oversight by congress will then be an indisputable article of impeachment.
Democratic Party activists have been hysterical over impeachment and "the resistance" since the day after the election in 2016.
While he says idiotic things, Trump's actual policies are no more radical than those of President Obama, who single handedly decided he can change immigration law after saying for years that he could not, for spending money on Obamacare that was not allocated by Congress, for handing assets to union auto workers who were not entitled to them as part of the GM bailout, for appointing members to the NLRB without Senate confirmation when the Senate said it *was* in session (see the Supreme Court slap at Obama if you forgot that one),.....
The public across the country (as opposed to readers of the NY Times) do not regularly parse every word emanating from the Mueller report or from the mouths of CNN and MSNBC anchors.
And just to add a bit of humor, should the Democratic House vote for impeachment, it will take less than a week for the Senate to vote for acquittal.
So, go ahead, Nancy, make my day.
Have the House vote for impeachment.
At least we'll have something interesting to watch on TV for a week.
Then disheartened Democrats from across the country will stay home on Nov 3, 2020.
2
Trump is clearly a typical bully - and like all bullies, is sure to back down when challenged. This can be seen from the way he fires people by tweet rather than face to face (unless it's on a "reality" tv show), and his admiration for strongman-type leaders
3
Impeachment is rare. But should it be?
It is likely that every elected official and every judge in the country is fully competent, completely honest and dedicated to the public interest all the time? I find that hard to credit.
Impeachment should be a constant threat, to keep people in line. It's only because Donald knows he has the senate in his pocket that he persists in his lawless ways.
Pardon me if I don't see how the Democrats have the upper hand. The House can impeach, yes. But the Senate won't convict. No matter what. This will give Trump another opportunity to claim victory and that he has been "exonerated," stoking his base. In the meantime, unless a few million of the excess Democrats in California, New York, etc. have moved strategically to the right voting precincts in the right swing states, the Electoral College is stacked against the Democrats. Will the Supreme Court save us? Not likely. Upper hand? More like a very tenuous beachhead, without a lot of air cover.
Interesting analogy - I like it. What wasn't said, is that the Democrats need a fearless, very intelligent leader - their own General Grant.
I see Elizabeth Warren as that person.
2
Yes. It is time to act. I have faith in Pelosi's judgement, but this is all new, and she must be careful not to be TOO careful...
1
In that Trump autonomously declared America a monocracy, I'm wondering if those who voted for him in 2016 wanted that? There wasn't any referendum I can remember asking us if we mind if Trump makes our constitution obsolete and inapplicable anymore. Certainly, there must be some enforceable law somewhere, anywhere, that prohibits overthrowing our government without so much as a discussion, let alone a vote.
4
I keep hearing comments that impeachment will galvanize his base. His base will support him no matter what. Impeachment will galvanize the base of people who do NOT support Trump. And a lack of any attempt of the Dems to hold him accountable will undermine voter energy. Why support Dems if they're not going to do what they can to hold him accountable? Impeach Now
624
@Anne
I agree completely. His base is a small minority, and he can't win with only 35% of the vote. Democrats came back in a big way in 2018-a strong sign that most voters are fed up with the Republican party. Let's get on with impeachment proceedings, and make it public, like with Watergate!
55
@Anne
Impeachment would shift the main onus of investigation from the House to the Senate, enabling Republicans to truly close the case on Trump.
It's entirely nonsensical to give them the opportunity to wash away all the grime a year and a half before the election when you know that's exactly what they're going to do.
It took a Republican Senate two months to acquit Clinton. How long you think it'll take them with Trump?
The conclusion would be "TOTALLY EXONERATED" and Democrats would have no political recourse whatsoever, but to suffer in 2020 from a fully empowered incumbent encumbered by nothing.
7
@AGuyInBrooklyn
Defeatism in the cause of liberty is no virtue. The House will hold hearings that reveal truths we already know and more we don't yet know. The Senate, I mean Sen. McConnell, won't be able to hide that.
24
Tyranny may be resisted only by a steadfast belief in the law and its execution. The Democrats have this advantage. Being timorous of "popular will" is no solution - it's betting on a chimera. Meanwhile, there is the law to be enforced. If that feels like "scorched earth," know that it's better than the scorched earth of a lost republic.
2
Perhaps if elected officials focused more on governing and leading and less on politics, some of these dilemmas would fade away and the country could move forward.
If we're not going to impeach Donald Trump, then we should just remove the concept of impeachment from the Constitution entirely. If ever a president deserved impeachment, this is the guy.
2
Impeach Trump. McConnell will not let the Senate vote, but the voters will "convict" Trump in the November 2020 election.
6
McClennan is likely the worst general officer the US Army may have ever held. His inaction led to the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Union soldiers' lives. Though he rose to Engineer of the Port (NY) he is, was and will remain, timid, incurious and inconsequential. He should have been immediately stripped of rank and title.
1
When I think of an analogy to our current situation with Drumpf, I think of Bill Clinton, not General McClellan. Mr. Bouie's, yours is a strained analogy, and there are plenty of examples of military strategies that were over-agressive. Pelosi remembers the backlash against the Republicans after the Clinton impeachment and knows that history may repeat itself. Her strategy is to keep investigating until something turns up that finally can convince a substantial number of Republicans and independents that Trump should be impeached. Otherwise, impeachment looks like a partisan act to those non-Democrats.
2
But, there are huge differences between Trump’s impeachable behavior and Clinton’s behavior at the time of his impeachment. The case against Clinton was about his lying about a private act between Bill and Monica , nothing else.
In Trump’s case it about the obstruction of investigating him and all the illegal activities he has been doing. If the American people can see and hear about it all , know the real truth of Trump’s lies and behavior, see that he’s only out for himself...see that he’s dishonest through and through, I really doubt the impeachment proceedings would be favorable to Trump.
1
@NYC299- yes, and I’m going back to Clinton and his impeachment, it’s amazing that Clinton was impeached over so little, and Trump has over 20 separate investigations going on and there’s not enough?
Impeach now
2
He wants the Dem House to begin impeachment proceedings. It keeps him the main story. It convinces his base it is a rolling Dem coup. He is convinced that if it ever gets to his Senate it will not stand a chance. (He also wanted a trade war with China and a deal with N. Korea. How are those working?)
He figures he will be like his role model, Bill Clinton, popular with his base and unconvictable. He has forgotten Nixon. The 2nd Watergate break-in, the one that got caught, was on June 17, 1972. Through the 1972 landslide and until May of 1973, during the Senate TV hearings, Nixon maintained approval ratings in the low 60%'s.
https://historyinpieces.com/research/nixon-approval-ratings
Only then did his approval rating fall into the 30%'s, and it still took a year of convictions, firings, resignations, and endless stories and hearings to finally convince him to resign.
With about 22 Republicans running in for re-election in 2020. by next summer the pressure will not only be on Trump but on his party to be re-elected.
Nancy is on the right track. Proceed, but methodically. Help him impeach himself and push the courts to allow Congress its full and rightful powers. Keep boxing him in. Like Nixon, even if he were re-elected in the meantime, he can still be impeached afterward and convicted. He is self-destructing in slo-mo. He feels no shame, but America will.
4
As Abraham Lincoln said of U.S Grant after the latter was assailed for heavy losses at Shiloh early during the war, "I can't spare this man, he fights!" And as Lincoln said later on to reassure Grant and approve of Grant's strategy, "Hold on with a bulldog grip, and chew and choke as much as possible." A real fight is what a bully always fears.
2
It is a matter of convention. Just as there is no half victory in battle, there is no half victory in impeachment. One could argue that impeaching Trump would be winning a battle, but risking losing the war. I think the Democrats are being strategic in being somewhat unpredictable. Impeachment is probably the most obvious and attention grabbing move they could make, but is it the most effective? I expect the Democrats to continue to investigate Trump and his administration and to continue to expose his disregard for the rule of law and the Constitution. Why risk giving him something to rally against when he is so intent on mortally wounding himself?
Trump doesn't want to be impeached. The impeachment would be the election, in effect, with America sharply divided over the issue. An issue, by the way, unlike immigration, Trump can't control. It would be made immediately obvious that the majority of Americans want him out, and his chances in an actual election would be deeply compromised and preordained.
3
From an institutional perspective, impeachment is overdue when an executive displays abundant disregard for the rule of law and co-equal branches of government. And another six years of greased appointments to the federal judiciary is profoundly disturbing. One has to ask, however, as Pelosi evidently is asking herself, what is the effect on the republic if Trump successfully spins the China quagmire, and the good intentions on domestic policy in the House are side-railed by protracted impeachment? In other words, does the general public understand the deep but abstract constitutional stakes, or is it wholly preoccupied by more immediate personal crises (without, perhaps, understanding how much they owe to Trumpian deception and mismanagement)?
1
Good analysis. Seems that inaction doesn't win wars. It is frustrating watching the congressional Democrats we worked so hard to elect not using their powers. Instead they try to look busy with committees, investigations and statements to the press to avoid more meaningful actions. In addition to impeachment, they could also exercise their power over the "purse strings" to curb the Republicans' worst excesses. Speaker Pelosi forced Trump to capitulate over the border wall in this way. Why aren't we seeing this strategy any more.
1
Do we want the revelations of Trump's criminality to unfold before the eyes of the American people every day until the election in 2020 or do we want Trump to gloat about his "innocence" every day until then, convincing some here and convincing some there?
We need to expose everything about Trump and impeachment is how to do it. Impeachment would reinforce the importance of the rule of law over the rule of lawlessness that Trump espouses. This is ultimately a teaching moment for the children of America.
If we don't hold Trump's feet to the fire and he wins in 2020 we'll all just have to accept the new American way: steal everything not nailed down. Whoopee! Why not? As they say in this new age of Trump: "nothing matters."
I'll take the rule of law, please.
5
Well stated... I agree. Impeachment hearings will reveal all the disgusting behavior that’s been going on, it will show the American public his treasonous acts, his obstruction of justice, etc.....bring it on!
2
What a fascinating comparison: McClellan to present day Democrats. But, the underlying thesis is wrong. And, this is coming from a person who voted against Trump and in favor of HC. Overlooked here is that Mueller found no evidence of conspiracy( collusion). The point is neither Trump nor his people conspired with Russia though the suspicion he or his people did fueled a counter espionage FBI investigation of Trump and his campaign and the Mueller investigation. That is the earth shattering news not mentioned in the article. So, then moving on to obstruction. To be sure Trump pushed back. But, he was impotent. He actually did nothing. His own people ignored his efforts. As to his public statements, such as "please hack" or disclose what you already hacked, this is a joke. The Russians were doing it already. And, they were doing much more. It is not clear Trump could even be charged now or later with "attempted" obstruction and all the more so when there was no underlying crime. So, then what of the subpoenas from the house pursuant to its oversight function. Let's be fair, even to Trump. This is not oversight to see if all is functioning. This is an effort to make up for what Mueller did not deliver, that Trump et al was in fact a Russian stooge. Please Democrats do something constructive: you are not, and Americans will vote Trump back in, unless you deliver on all the problems that need to be addressed apart from Trump.
@Bian It's about doing what is right and just: start the impeachment and stand up for something, something we believe in.
Say the following words and know it's the right thing to do: Mitch McConnell
You are mistaken in your analysis, no doubt due to your bias. Most of the things you stated are wrong pure and simple. For example, you think a person cannot be charged with obstruction of justice if there was not a crime, wrong,
You also blow past all the connections with Russia as if nothing was going on, over one hundred connections and everyone lied about it.....just because mueller didn’t have enough proof to prove it....thanks to zero cooperation, and zero response to any inquiries and requests.
And clearly, Mueller found multiple counts of obstruction, and stated so.....Barr , whitewashed the report...he should be impeached also, for his obstruction of justice.
How about they learn to accept the results of elections they lose? That is, if you actually care about the Republic.
I agree. Handing control of the House to Democrats was an overwhelming vote by the people for oversight and checks on the President. Somehow he and his complicit Republican Party saw it as a sign to double down on the imperial presidency.
2
As a near-obsessive over contemporary politics and the Civil War, I am super into this whole thought exercise. But I'd suggest a different Civil War analogy for the Democrats: the Grant/Sherman victory plan of 1864.
By pursuing impeachment, Pelosi and the Congressional majority can play Grant's role: keeping the enemy's main force pinned down and on the defensive. Meanwhile the eventual Democratic nominee is Sherman: seizing the initiative through a positive policy vision. But you need both forces for the strategy to succeed.
2
He failed to mention that McClellan was a Democrat and the Democratic nominee for POTUS in 1864.
Nancy Pelosi and the other timid folk have nothing to worry about should they choose to pursue the impeachment process (hopefully much sooner than later). If Independents and moderate Democrats are turned off by the impeachment process, after it brings to light the multiple instances of coordination and cooperation with the Russians and obstruction of justice by Trump, then the rest of us were doomed anyway. Better to let the Canadian government know you'd like to come sooner rather than later. And while I know that Pelosi is "brilliant" in the same way Bill Clinton was "brilliant," she should consider this: if Trump is merely not elected in 2020, and he and his collaborators are not appropriately exposed and punished for their crimes, the USA will be permanently damaged, this type of behavior will have been greatly encouraged, and she and the other timid folk will go down in history as those who allowed it to happen.
1
Thank you for this wise and helpful article.
Most Americans are horrified by his presidency. His followers are a minority of people. We must remember that and stay strong.
It will already take years to fix the mess he’s made, so let’s get him out before descending further into madness.
This isn’t the time to act meekly. A firm “No” needs to be said to the worst president in American history.
2
I agree with Jamelle that the Democrats have more of an advantage in this fight than they are willing to press; chief among them is the truth. Step one is impeachment proceedings in the House, where the power of public testimony by subpoenaed willing witnesses, and claims of the fifth by the unwilling, will do what Mueller in his report could not or would not do, being hamstrung by OLC opinion. Mueller basically left the indictment of Trump at the doorstep of Congress. It's up to them to either proceed, or ignore it.
The House needs to conduct it's constitutional responsibilities, not shirk them based on what they might expect the Senate to do. Or even how they may expect the public to react. There is a festering, oozing infection in the executive branch in desperate need of a lot of sunshine.
My position is to investigate, follow the evidence where it leads, let impeachment be a result of overwhelming evidence that includes republicans in favor, rather than a goal that drives a search for appropriate evidence.
That said, if Trump is impeached, that does not mean that he is thrown from office, and if he is impeached AND thrown from office without republicans on board, then Pence will be president and likely the candidate for 2020. Two more years of an unimpeached Trump is likely a better guarantee of a democrat winning in 2020 than impeaching without conservative cover.
1
The impeached Clinton was not convicted because his proven offenses were not serious enough and because more and more people came to believe that Republicans were just out to get him. Trump's offenses far outnumber Clinton's in number and severity, and more and more people may come to believe that Democrats are out to get him because he deserves to be gotten, since he in fact does deserve to be gotten.
The impeached Trump may not be convicted, but this will be because the Republican Party and much of its base has gone mad and refuses to deal with reality. Most Americans will see an unconvicted Trump as being as innocent as O.J.
1
Nancy Pelosi did not have the spine to stand up to Cheney or Wall Street. I have no expectation of her developing one now.
Traitors are far more dangerous than the obvious enemy. It never would have gotten to this point, if she and Steny Hoyer and Barack Obama had done their jobs in 2009. Because politics abhors a vacuum, the only thing of consequence that happened was the formation of the Tea Party. Barack was vacationing on Martha's Vineyard at the time, with various fat cats.
We did this to ourselves.
1
Mr. Bouie’s analogy is entirely wrong. Yes, the examples he lists are partly of excessive caution, but equally of a lack of good intelligence, which clouds the picture. The intelligence with respect to Mr. Trump is, however, crystal clear: there is no doubt whatsoever that Mr. Trump will not be removed from office even if the House votes to impeach him because the Senate will not follow suit. So impeachment by the House will be symbolic and nothing more.
I note that the drumbeat for impeachment from the far left fringe of the Democratic Party assumes that the House will vote in favor. But I don’t know that that’s a foregone conclusion. Democratic Party representatives in swing electoral districts cannot be relied on to vote in favor of impeachment. Ms. Pelosi and the Democratic leadership are probably concerned not only about the electoral backlash to impeachment, but also about a failure to secure an impeachment vote in the House (I think it’s fair to say that no Republican representatives will vote in favor of impeachment). If the House doesn’t impeach, it will not only be embarrassing to the Democratic Party and its leadership, but will reveal deep fissures in the party.
1
If Democrats do not impeach Trump for his unrelenting attacks on our democracy we might as well change Article 2 Section 4 of the Constitution to read:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Lying under oath about having an sex with an Intern. Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors are frowned upon, but we're cool with it if the Senate Majority and President share the same Party.
If Democrats run away from their responsibility to defend the Constitution, they are at best a kinder gentler version of the oath breakers in the GOP. And that's not good enough.
1
Speaker Pelosi, can you hear us now?
1
Agreed. But never mind. Trump. He will go, but in McConnell the Repubs have their permanently installed burn-it-to-the-ground Wm. Tecumseh Sherman. To think otherwise is to delude oneself.
Dems stand little chance of taking back the Senate, and must bring forth their own Sherman for the Oval Office.
Who is that general? Step forward. I'll follow him or her to the ends of the earth.
5
Dems do have the upper hand and it is past time
to start using it
Trump is a gangster and every dem should say
so over and over again
why the MSM might actually take notice.
1
Impeachment hearings conducted by the Democratically-controlled House, with a plethora of live witnesses and documentary evidence, and televised with prodigious viewing audiences will rivet the public’s attention, leave Trump basically helpless out in a media no-man’s land, and day after day drive home the depth and breadth of his corrupt and criminal behaviors. These hearings will, to the Democrats’ overwhelming advantage, suck the Republicans’ counter narrative out of the room. Even if a Republican-controlled Senate refuses to convict, the election table against Trump will have been ruinously set for him and all G.O.P. candidates, forever memorialized in a compelling series of stinging articles of impeachment. They will have been boxed into a corner with nowhere to run, put completely in a weakened defensive posture. Do it Dems!
2
The analogy is a bit strained here. The Union missed a chance to inflict a defeat, which would have taken territory and weakened the South's military position. It's not at all clear what will be gained by impeaching Trump since it will go nowhere in the Senate. Will it make him weaker or stronger? Whether they impeach or not, the battle will continue to be one for public opinion. Right now that looks like trench warfare.
1
This situation is unique in American history because all signs indicate that Trump is backed by a very angry base that supports totalitarianism. Trump is leading what appears to be an attempted white nationalist takeover of the United States and in this circumstance it is hard to fault the Democrats for moving slowly. It seems that the only way to stop this attack on democratic government from the right is at the ballot box. There needs to be a clear unmistakable message that most Americans still want a democratic republic. In the old days of balanced mainstream media the side fighting for democracy would probably win easily but now there is a right wing media ecosystem that mixes true facts with propaganda and outright lies which has led to a large segment of the US population unable to tell the difference between lies and the truth. They consider the Democrats as untrustworthy elites and no matter on how solid ground are the views of the Democrats they are not believed. Given the present circumstances I would not rush to impeach.
“I am damned smarter man than Grant. I know more about military history, strategy, and grand tactics than he does. I know more about supply, administration, and everything else than he does. I'll tell you where he beats me though and where he beats the world. He doesn't give a damn about what the enemy does out of his sight, but it scares me like hell. … I am more nervous than he is. I am more likely to change my orders or to countermarch my command than he is. He uses such information as he has according to his best judgment; he issues his orders and does his level best to carry them out without much reference to what is going on about him and, so far, experience seems to have fully justified him.” - General William Tecumseh Sherman
This really boils down to: how would an impeachment impact the 2020 election in purple states? We can all agree that they would have no impact on true-blue and inexcusably-red states - so, what about those in-between?
To some degree, the Democrats need to be concerned about Clinton- and Obama-voters who switched to Trump. These are the voters who determine the Electoral College results; it does no good to pick-up a million more California voters. It is important to pick-up 100,000 more Florida votes; and Wisconsin, and Ohio.
I teach at the university level and it regularly astounds me how little today's high school graduates know of our system of government, or our democratic traditions, or even our basic democratic values. My students, for example, regularly express apathy to government warrantless wiretapping, taking an "I'm not doing anything wrong, so I don't care" approach. Many dislike Trump for policy reasons, but they don't know enough about civics to appreciate the basic anti democratic nature of his actions.
THIS is the elephant in the room. The educated elite of both parties more or less complied with governing norms, however corrupt their intentions were, but the minute a man who cared nothing for these norms came to power, there was little pushback from the public because a large part of the public is utterly and happily ignorant of the norms.
I won't get on my soapbox too much, but this is a problem that will take a generation to fix and I am afraid we don't have that much time.
7
@Chris best comment of the day.
@Chris Yes, please get on your soap box, it is needed; the loss of reading centered high school programs has generally dumbed down thinking for these kids. Fear of reprisals by parents and principals, demand for grade inflation all distract from the basic and fundamental importance of reading. What is that famous quote, Read before you Think, and Think before you Speak. Too many people yammering, too few reading.
If Trump is impeached do we have Pence for President? Not a word from Pence for months, though even more appealing to Trump's base. Caution. As for Mnuchin, he has devalued a Yale degree,
1
Republican Senators can convict Trump, they just cannot, if they care about their political future, appear to turn on him before there is a trial. Their lives are much easier if there is no trial, which was not a worry before Mueller finished and Democrats won the House. Now they can only posture and cry foul, hoping to scare off the Democrats.
Waiting until one party has both the House and 2/3 of the Senate means waiting forever. Democrats can take advantage of the public's short attention span and impeach Trump soon. If it fails, it will be forgotten in November 2020 by most undecided voters.
There is rarely a reward for cowardice.
3
If the polls are correct, only about 25% of the electorate support trump. The vast majority does not.
Clinton won a majority of the votes cast in 2016 as did Democrats in the mid-terms.
There is no doubt of trump's corruption or his ambitions, nor is there doubt as to who has contributed to and acted in furtherance of both - a hostile nation and the Republican party. The latter of the two we would be correct to also refer to as hostile to democracy and the Constitution.
There is no law nor any suggestion in the Constitution that a sitting President is above the law - just the opposite. As a nation of laws, no man is above the law. But both the Republican party and this president have made clear beyond any doubt, they have no respect for either law or Constitution and will forsake both in pursuit of power.
I do not understand the timidity, the wavering and second guessing as to what to do about a president who has been proven guilty of criminal wrongdoing, and a party whose aided and abetted every step of the way. Justice delayed is justice denied.
Enforce the law.
The future of our country demands it.
The majority of the people demand it.
Do it now.
4
The Democrats have crafted talking points consistently put forth in the media: Impeachment is divisive, destined to fail in the Senate, and the "people" want us to concentrate on the bread and butter issues that impact their daily lives.
These talking points are the result of faulty reasoning. Our country is already polarized to the point that Trump's base and the GOP will defend him no matter what outrage he perpetrates . (SNL this past Saturday). As to the certainty of a Senate acquittal, it is just as certain that any bread and butter legislation passed by the House will be tossed in the Senate garbage can by Mitch McConnell.
What is at stake, however, is not in dispute: Trump's defiance of Congress and the norms of governance (along with his divisiveness, ignorance and deceit) is a current threat to our democracy. He has and will push the limits unless severely smacked down. The commencement of impeachment hearings are the only smack down he would understand .Public opinion may follow the evidence presented, but Dems must muster courage as a first step.
As to bread and butter issues, (healthcare, climate change, equitable taxation, infrastructure, education etc.) the Democrats should craft legislation and Nancy Pelosi should have regular press conferences to detail the agenda that a Democratic Congress and Administration would put forth, pointing out that Trump would kill those progressive policies, and McConnell will bury them.
3
The Congress is doing little of the American people’s business anyway, the house should impeach. Where is it written that a vote to impeach must be forwarded to the senate. Let the record sit there for history. Is anyone else getting sick of this pussyfooting with Mueller? Please push for getting Mueller in front of the cameras. We have just got to start mopping the floor with Trump and McConnell.
5
People keep forgetting the purpose of impeachment--it's the first step in removing a President (or other official) from office. What GOOD is impeaching Trump if chance of removal by the Senate is ZERO?
1
When there is a corrupt, autocratic President, impeachment by the House (followed, or not, by a trial in the Senate) is the only remedy set forth in the Constitution.
Our leaders took an oath to protect the Constitution, which the Framers took pains to craft so as to minimize or prevent corruption among government officials.
Corrupt government officials must face consequences. Absent impeachment, tRump and those who follow him will be emboldened to continue chipping away at our democracy until it is gone.
Impeachment is the only to convince Republicans to turn. If there is no impeachment, Republicans will never be convinced that enough Americans want him convicted and removed from office.
I have a great deal of faith in Nancy. She has always been left of center and a positive force in our politics. Her political judgement should not be dismissed. Let it play out a bit with Trumps total refusal for congressional oversight. As the pot boils there may come the right moment to move forward with impeachment proceeding. She's much closer to the pulse of the electorate than I am and I dare say others who try to portray her as week and hesitant. She's definitely neither
Joe
1
What does Trump want most? A fight. What is he least equipped to deal with? Being ignored.
My two cents is that as much as DJT deserves to be impeached - if not frog-marched out of office - the Dems should do their best to ignore him. "Trump? Is he still around? Oh, well, who cares what he tweeted today, here's our proposal for infrastructure, for rural Wi-Fi, for background checks for gun purchases, for green job training, for shoring up rural hospitals..."
2
We are now living under our nation's first dictator. And we know that impeachment will be a futile act. And yet, the House must impeach.
Why? Because doing nothing signals that we have no objection to Trump's criminal acts, his destruction of our rights, his seizure of absolute power. Our children and grandchildren must know that we didn't sit silently by, while a mad man seized control of our country. And we must signal to the forty percent who still support this disgusting man that nothing he does is in our name. That we, the majority, are sickened by what has happened to this country.
I'm a native-born American citizen in my sixties. I remember the Watergate era quite well. And Trump's actions, and the toadying of his Senate and his Supreme Court (for they are now his alone) are exponentially worse than anything Nixon ever did.
The majority of us want this "president" gone. Right? And we have been far too silent, our voices have been far too muted as we have grudgingly accepted the yoke of tyranny. That we now must bow down to forty percent of Americans who will have their extremist views satisfied, no matter who else they harm.
We are fast reaching a tipping point. Either we begin raising our voices, or we begin to accept that we will be living in a dictatorship for a very long time. And impeachment by the House gives us a voice. It gives us hope that some day we might rid ourselves of this tyrant. And it is way past time.
10
The real-world outcome from the Civil War is that the South *won't* rise again. All the economic and social indicators point to the South as being left behind by increasing urbanization, fueling better education, better healthcare, and an increased standard of living.
Meanwhile, the southern states, based on polling data, are more concerned with owning women's bodies, keeping down non-whites, and reclaiming "the good old days" where white men rule, Jesus is the only god, and change happens to other people.
The key to everything is Mueller. If and when he testifies, we then can judge how far the Dems. can go w/ these inquiries. I think it is a mistake to rule out benign testimony from Mueller. I think he is a straight shooter, but he is a Republican, and he was chosen by Rosenstein, another Republican. Let's not put the cart before the horse. We could end up in the same place as we did after Barr's sham exoneration.
Good grief--he's a poor real estate swindler likely suffering early-onset dementia. He's not Thanos!
Trump won't remove himself from office and the senate has never voted to remove a sitting president. All this hand-wring and garment-rending is pointless. We are virtually certain Trump has committed crimes in office. Keep investigating those crimes, but go for impeachment. He has earned it.
8
The Democrats need to take inspiration from General Ulysses S Grant. (Unconditional Surrender)
2
It appears there are three paths available to the Democrats: impeach, appease or capitulate. Only the former process will save this constitutional republic.
10
Another surgery we haven't yet developed is a spine transplant.
"What if they don't like us?" asks the so-called "Leadership" of the Dems.
They already don't like us, but they LOVE "Owning libs". So make sure they are owned instead. Use the powers the Constitution and the SCOTUS give the House. Use Inherent Obstruction for the House to have its own deputy-sargeants-at-arms. And take the law-breaking cabinet officials into custody!
The Trumpists will HOWL! Let them! They don't fight fair, don't follow rules, and will use every dirty trick, legal and illegal. That's the playing field THEY established so let them howl when Democrats play on that field.
4
We don't have to go so far afield as the Civil War. If there's one thing we all learn from schoolyard politics it's that the perception of weakness is far worse than any weakness itself.
Strike back. Strike hard. Strike often. But, above all, strike!
Whenever this bully has been confronted, he has shown himself to be a coward. He must be confronted at every turn.
8
I think this analysis is well worth considering. Ms. Pelosi?
1
I tend to agree. Comparisons to the unpopularity of Clinton's impeachment are tenupus at best best if you weigh the Clintons' suposed offenses and those of Trump, who beats them hands down on day o.e of his administration, and since then, he's got them beat a.hundred times over. History will not look good on Democrats' overcautious approach to this monster. Let's take him by the horns !
1
i saw a piece on CNN where there are over 20 investigations on going. hopw is this not a witch hunt and monumental waste of money
1
@Rhsmd1
20 investigations is alot of smoke. You don't believe that there is a fire somewhere? Or your partisanship makes it such that you don't care?
1
The longer the Democrats wait, the more foolish they appear. They need to act swiftly and methodically. The country can not afford to waste anymore time on not checking this president’s unprecedented disregard for the constitution.
2
Are we done yet? Enough!
3
McClellan wasn't necessarily wrong. If your military objective is reconciliation rather than annihilation, the Union's only path to victory simply meant not losing.
Why else would you appoint a cautionary general if you didn't want to prosecute a cautionary war? I don't think the North was really serious about killing thousands of Virginians until the threat of defeat actually became real. The North wanted a short and limited war. You might even say symbolic.
The South was obviously aware of the political imbalance much earlier than they were. Lee used this to his advantage. He was fighting a battle of political attrition against the North's strategy of economic attrition. If he could simply sap the Union's political will enough, the public would eventually force the government to seek terms. It almost worked.
Of course, the plan backfired tremendously because political necessity eventually forced the North to resort to total war. Developing and implementing tactics that would be used to horrific effect in WWI and also permanently alienating the South from their Union counterparts. You're left wishing McClellan had been right.
However, the lesson is pretty clear: You can't achieve a military objective your opponent will never allow politically. Trump is fighting for keeps. Democrats better start acting like it.
6
@Andy
My take - start the investigations. The war of attrition wil not wear well for Trump.
1
I'm sure there are many analogies in war strategy. The policy of "appeasement" toward Hitler comes to mind. Democrats aren't appeasing Trump so much as his rabid "base" whom he can whip up to frenzy and use to seize even more power while Republicans in Congress cheer him on. They are also appeasing those nervous "moderate" Biden voters who "just want to get along" and pretend that the Republican juggernaut is not coming for them.
1
Let's assume that impeachment proceedings take place and the Senate refuses to convict. Then what?
Then, the Democrats should, and probably will, go on the offensive for 1/3 of the seats in the Senate. The Republican majority in the Senate is not so huge that it cannot be tipped in favor of the Democrats in 2020. So even if Trump were reelected, he would face a much tougher legislative row to hoe. And even if the Republicans maintain a slim majority in the Senate, his walk could not be as strident as it has been, particularly during the first two years of his Presidency, when he got surprisingly little done, excluding his packing the courts with cronies.
I say go ahead with impeachment. If Trump wants to continue slinging innuendoes and accusations, let's take off the gloves and slug it out. This ain't beanbag. This is a fight for representative government.
5
I still agree with Nancy Pelosi that impeachment of Trump is the wrong way to go at this time. Trump has been giving orders to his subordinates and ex-subordinates to ignore Congress, but it is unclear that these orders have any legal weight. I support taking meaningful action against those who have directly defied Congress, in ways that members of Congress have proposed. Additionally, attorneys who have been held in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with subpoenas should have complaints filed against them with appropriate attorney disciplinary commissions. Suspension or revocation of a law license might get their attention.
As for Trump's lawsuit against Rep. Elijah Cummings, the Constitutional "Speech or Debate" clause (Article I, Section 6) prohibits such action. Any judge doing his/her job should immediately throw it out of court. Congress can also move to impeach judges who fail to do their jobs.
1
The House must vote to Impeach.They must demand an unredacted text of the Mueller report and access to all relevant documents and testimony as part of this procedure, and if Trump doesn't wish to add Contempt to the charges, he must comply. Those are the demands that the Law itself will make.
How fast this will happen, it's hard to say -- but every version of the drama that will then play out leaves the final decision in the hands of the American People. Even if the Senate tries and convicts him, Trump can at least attempt to appeal that conviction to the Court, on which his party holds a majority. Can all this happen in a year and a half, in an election year, with much else happening at the same time? If anything happens, that's what will happen. Can Trump distract us with an increasingly ruinous trade war? Can his toadies turn the Department of Justice into an army in the field, investigating and prosecuting his political enemies? Will Mitch McConnell be forced to decide between surrendering to his political opponents and a dreadful series of reaffirmations of all the times he's freshened his soul up to sell it one more time? Yes. This is our Game of Thrones, finally starting. And it's about damn time.
2
Mr. Bouie, the comparisons you mention are pathetically wrong except for the one parallel that you did not draw upon. Trump, the GOP and their financial backers are in fact coddling to the same emotions that Southern leaders and generals used to drum up support during The War.
Making America Great Again is really more about Making America White Again. And since that isn't likely to happen, their goals are more about consolidating support among mostly white voters, gerrymandering voting districts, limiting non-white voter access and filling the courts with like-minded judges.
But back to your point. Impeachment is a powerful tool if used wisely. Here I believe that before proceedings are initiated - and there is still much time to do so - it would be better to not include impeachment into the primary season because that will then become the central talking point of any and all debates.
Let us pick a winning ticket or at the very least narrow the field of candidates some. Let us debate dinner-table issues. And perhaps permit the House to investigate a wee bit deeper.
A move toward impeachment today, will suck all of the air out of the media for more honest talk about America, its problems and its future.
Perhaps in a year from now, after Muller has testified along with a few others; after the Democratic candidate pool has been narrowed down some, after America has been reminded about what is truly at stake, then perhaps we can let the hammers of justice come down.
4
The Civil War analogy is interesting for I believe we are indeed headed for some 21st Century version of it, albeit a bloodless one. I think. Democrats seem incompetent and veering too far left to stay in power. Republicans seems unwilling or unable to contain the baser instincts or Trump and his base. Not much room in the middle for folks like me. Seems like the war has already begun.
1
@John Jabo,
Mr. Jabo, I doubt the next Civil War (which I agree with you, is definitely on the horizon) will be bloodless.
2
If Trump (and while we're at it, Pence and everyone else who has enabled him) doesn't deserve impeachment, whom are we saving that weapon for?
Clinton's impeachment did strengthen his approval ratings, mostly because it was the result of a fishing expedition after Ken Starr's failure to find evidence to prosecute the Clintons for a real estate deal *in which they lost a huge amount of money.* (That never made sense.) That impeachment was clearly motivated by the spitefulness that has been standard operating procedure for the Republicans since Newt Gingrich. Anyone who wasn't a Fox News zombie could see that.
However, this president has triggered a Constitutional crisis by refusing to comply with legitimate requests from Congress. Let this one slide, and we're on the road to dictatorship.
Yeah, yeah, I know that Trump's cultists will be furious, and it is unnerving to know that they tend to be armed, but I would be willing to bet that an equal or larger number of people on the left are weary of the Democratic Party's timid responses to Republican offenses.
8
In addition to the Mueller Report most probably there is a counter intelligence investigation going on - at least one. We may never know the results of this investigation but can hope the perpetrators will be taken care of. For more about this, listen to the Lawfare podcast https://www.lawfareblog.com/lawfare-podcast-john-sipher-muellers-report-russian-intelligence-operations
1
Headline for the NYT " Dithering Democrats Meet Their Waterloo". Now watching the bouncing ball sing along :
"Where will you meet your Waterloo?
Every puppy has its day
Everybody has to pay
Everybody has to meet his Waterloo"
1
@romac,
The Republican Party has long met its Waterloo, and it going to take a heart of stone and mettle on the part of a United Democratic Front to bail it out of The Swamp.
As Trump tries to block all investigatory calls, if effective, the Democrats will have no choice but to impeach. Before then if Don McGahn and Mueller testify which they may independent of Trump threats and wishes we can get at least that oversight. Afterwards we can see what to do if it occurs. If all oversight is effectively blocked by Trump, Congress has little choice.
2
This strategy will guarantee that Trump wins a second term. It is a complete waste of time; the Senate will never vote for impeachment. Time would be better spend on immigration, infrastructure and healthcare. If Jerry Nadler is the face of the Democratic party they will surely win HUGE majorities in California and New York - and lose the election.
3
Definitely Democrats can outnumber. Seem a bit timid. Trump's Shell Game is off putting. But if Democrats can decode the con, Damn the Torpedos, Full Speed Ahead. Trump makes his base appear larger than really is. Like GWTW scenes shot with dummy moving parts on war field to appear more soldiers. Trump just has alot of dummy moving parts going...........
It all comes down to this, especially at this moment: The best defense is a powerful offense. Pelosi be damned along with the rest of the mealy-mouthed Democrats.
You have to be a fool to think that "self-impeachment" is a strategy. It reeks of meekness and surrender.
4
The question is not, and has never been, whether one fights.
The question is how one fights.
And while Bouie has a point about McClellan—the guy wouldn’t have attacked if he saw that there were just two guys and a goat in front of him—another lesson to learn from the Civil War is that it’s damn hard to be Lincoln when your own side is constantly jumping you from behind.
I’m way past tired of posturing “leftists,” who’ve got pretty much your average Trumpist’s disdain for anybody who disagrees with them, and exactly their disinterest in realities, without the willingness to show up and vote.
And I can’t help but get the impression that a lot of self-anointed progressives, a) are more interested in purges than helping anybody, and b) will go the way of Jon Voight, become Republicans, and dine out on tales of the excesses of the Left.
1
Unlike McClellan though, Democrats already know for certain the outcome of an impeachment proceeding. Since it hasn't happened already, there is simply no way 19 Republican Senators will suddenly grow a conscience if and when the House votes to impeach.
Trump and his supporters will crow till the next election and beyond after the inevitable "Not Guilty" verdict.
Pelosi has this one right.
6
@Michael Lueke But they're going to crow anyway. And you assume that the process of impeachment will not reveal to the American people facts and circumstances of which they are now ignorant. Finally, not responding to his obstruction in a forceful way will set a horrible precedent.
Winning another 4 year would be Trump first choice in running out the clock. Impeachment is the next best alternative because he would be able to negotiate to be pardon or self-pardon from all potential crimes committed by his family.
At this juncture, actions at the State level may provide a more effective check against Trump. For example, State Legislators should consider passing legislations that require all candidates for national office release their tax returns for the past 5 years if they want their names to appear on the ballot. If the Democrats are able to get legislatures in several large States to past such requirement, Trump may have no choice but to release his tax returns if he wants to run for re-election.
(2) file the State attorneys file indictments at the State levels, and to ensure that any pardons at the Federal level would not also nullify legal actions at the State level. NY has already initiated legislative actions to that end. Other State attorneys in States might also consider similar action to avoid the chance that the Statute of limitation would run out.
5
I believe Democrats in the House should open up impeachment proceedings to continue the investigation Mueller began, thereby giving themselves the legal and Constitutional footing that will get them past the court challenges Trump will throw at them. They also should not bring impeachment to a vote before the 2020 election as Senate Republicans would "acquit" him and give him the argument he wants to use in the election. Pursue the investigation but hold off on the conviction vote as voters may render it unnecessary.
5
Hesitating over impeachment demonstrates a lack of resolve that can only embolden the trend off GOP lawlessness.
Pelosi should take a lesson from Obama's mistakes. He played for center too often and we have all paid the price for it. The elimination of Merritt Garland is a good example. McConnell delayed the confirmation hearings so long he ran out the clock. In the last months of his presidency Obama could have cited those Senate delays as a dereliction of duty, seated Garland by executive order, and let the Republicans explain the purpose of their obstruction to the Courts. He had nothing to lose. He was leaving office, Democrats had lost power in both Houses, and he was holding the center for what? I have no doubt today Obama's rightful choice could be sitting in the Supreme Court right now if he had used the Constitutional authority he had. And we'll be paying for it for decades.
8
Impeaching Trump should be the plan. Regardless of the Senate not cooperating, Trump will probably become more erratic in his actions which will threaten his re-election to a great extent. The fall back from failure to impeach is voting Trump out in 2020, a realizable goal due to his low approval ratings and a superior blue vote. The DP must have a coherent election plan as in the 2018 midterms additionally.
8
The house of representatives, note the lower case, is failing in its duty to the people of the united states. While mr. t. goes on ranting and railing they are nearly silent. If ms Pelosi is unable to rally democratic members then for the 2nd time I urge her to appoint someone who will or resign her post. Her failure to take charge of this impeachment is nearly as serious as mr. t’s illegal behavior. Mr. Nagel has the power to call mr. t to task and I can only hope that he can lead the way to impeachment while Pelosi dawdles.
3
The historical analogy is interesting but irrelevant. Perhaps McClellan saw that the kind of war he was being asked to fight meant the death of 600,000 soldiers before the end, and that firefights were not the same as swordsmen charging at one another.
The Dems have been on the defensive since Reagan. Clinton was Reagan-in-disguise or Reagan-lite, trying hard to appeal to Republicans. The real lesson of the Civil War is how the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were passed: WITHOUT THE SOUTH, effectively disenfranchising the Rebels while claiming at the same time that they were still part of the country. The Democratic party cannot bridge the gap to include radical rightist politicians in their agenda. They must pass a Sanders-style progressive agenda or be understood as the Republican B-team. To impeach or not to impeach seems irrelevant as well.
3
Nonsense.
McClellan just plain froze, every single chance he got.
They didn’t have “Firefights.”
The War was fundamentally about slavery. As Lincoln said, that evil would have to be expunged in blood if it took a thousand years.
Those Amendments were ratified by a majority of states, following the Constitution.
Why would a “Sanders-style,” guy take the precise position of the Lost Cause types like David Duke?
1
As we are into military analogies let's try the medieval approach. Lay siege to Trump and deny him the ability to maneuver and resupply. The House can easily do this by making the next quarterly budget appropriation and next Fiscal Years budget so lean that the Executive Branch doesn't have one extra dime to spend. The House can also restrict Trump's access to the military by not funding any foreign adventures unless there is a Declaration of War. Bring our troops home from overseas and we may even have a budget surplus. One last thought, Air Force One and Secret Service Protection should only be used for 100 percent official business. Having no more weekends away from Washington will perhaps encourage Trump to resign.
2
While I agree that Trump is self-impeaching, it would be best for Democrats to strike when they are prepared to make their case to the only jury that matters, the voters.
We know that the Senate will not convict Trump. They are not the audience. Pelosi and the Democrats actually need to goad Trump to increase the severity of his impeachable offenses. Once he does, a subsequent impeachment will reveal the danger he represents and he will be defeated. Acting too early is like a prosecutor going to trial without enough to convict. The perp gets off and there is no do over.
General McClellan was a smart, well disciplined commander who could plan but not execute. He had the full power of the Potomac Army behind him along with many opportunities to confront the Confederate forces but lacked the intestinal fortitude to do so. Had he engaged early on the massacre at Antietam may never had occurred. But the story doesn't end there, after McClellan was removed from command he ran as a Democrat against Lincoln in the 1864 election and lost. McClellan even went as far as to dispute the Democratic platform of negotiation with the Confederacy.
By all means the Democrats are just like McClellan. They think, they talk and in the end they can't agree on anything. In the meantime the Republicans forge ahead and win.
4
I don't know the answer to this question but would love to and it seems central to the impeachment issue. If the House starts impeachment proceedings can they compel more testimony? If yes, then they should impeach. If not, then I do not see the upside to impeachment and they should focus on proposals that lay the ground for winning in 2020. In any case they should latter, which is the first order of business.
2
Just to be clear, Mr. Bouie chooses to use an actual violent rebellion as his illustration case here. Thousands died and many more were hurt in the Civil War actions that he cites. It is unlikely to be helpful to choose the imagery of mass killing as a way to talk about remedies for alleged political wrongdoing. I understand that he feels strong emotions but I doubt that his writing will help the USA to become a better place. I encourage him to choose more carefully next time.
4
At Fredericksburg the Union forces marched across the Rapahanock directly into the teeth of the Confederate forces who had them surrounded on three sides leading to the slaughter of thousands on the Union side. There of course is a time for action and a time to martial your forces, make sure of your tactics as best you can and plan carefully. The enemy may be there in sight, but this does not always lead to victory. When Grant took over after Gettysburg, he knew exactly where he was going and how to get there despite heavy loses along the way. To Look before leaping seems to be Pelosi's plan and she seems to think the time is not right for a full on frontal assault like impeachment. But the time will come and we must be ready for a hard fight as long as we know we must defeat Trump, the goal of which we can not lose sight.
3
Mr. Bouie, if you have ever ridden a horse that takes the bit between his teeth, you can start praying, and not braying that your charger is going to be blocked by an obstacle after he has run his course before flying over his head.
Trump took the initiative before he was elected president, and here in Republican territory where I am visiting, my country men and women are going to vote for him again.
According to Tabloid News, our president thought it a shame when there was a move to take down the statue of Robert E. Lee known as the Man on the Grey Horse, his loyal horse named Traveler.
This American, born on a Dutch Island in New York City, got a bit choked up too in a mist of nostalgia remembering that my great grandfather joined The Confederacy at nineteen and fought under Stonewall Jackson, and by the time my French parent placed a spin on this family anecdote, he was Lee's right-hand man. This is known as hokum, but the family came North.
Honesty is dicey on occasion, but there is no person whom I am closely acquainted to, familial or in friendship, who would vote for Trump once let alone twice from A to Z, and representatives of all allied countries.
Bridging the gap between The North and The South might take place regardless of any president, while it is Biden and Buttigieg for this voter. Next year is here, and the ball is in the court of The Democrats who appear to be engaged in see-sawing.
Let us take our Beloved Country with us, one cherished above all.
2
All analogies are flaws, in particular, historic analogies. Mark Twain said: "History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme."
Trump has finally surrounded himself by willing pirates like himself. They intend to peal the onion completely, striping out the justice department, the state department and other agencies until they have the tool of tyranny that they seek.
As Lincoln said, "As our cause is new so let us act anew and thereby save our country." Let the Sergent of Arm of the House arrest these creatures of Trump. If the DC Court won't let him, sue to try them for prosecutorial misconduct. Push for Rule 11 to expedite cases against Barr and Trump. Fine them $25,000 a day. Don't ask nice. If Mueller won't appear: subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he's a no-show. Push to have Barr, McGahn, and Giuliani disbarred if charged with contempt or other crimes against Article I.
5
The Union eventually defeated the Confederacy not by strength of will or belief in their cause, but by the sheer will of numbers and resources. Like the Democrat party today in opposition to Trump, they eventually overwhelmed the Confederates with a win at any cost strategy. Witness the siege of Vicksburg where Grant threw assault after assault at impregnable Confederate defenses despite the senselessness of each attack. Witness Sherman's march to the sea, and his policy of scorched earth for both southern civilians and soldiers. The Democrats may win in the end with their endless calls for impeachment. But in winning they will reveal themselves to be the ruthless win at any cost people that they are.
26
@paul Fine with me.
46
@paul Your reference to the "Democrat party" betrays your partisan position. And your charactering of the Democratic opposition as ruthless is what psychologists would call projection -- attributing to others your own "win at any cost" mindset. Unfortunately for the country, your party's achievements for most of the country are non-existent.
252
@paul Merrick Garland. The Republicans have already revealed themselves to be ruthless, at any cost.
212
I'm a lifelong liberal Democrat, and at this point I am so disgusted with the timidity of Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Party leadership that I am seriously considering re-registering as an independent.
Democrats used to stand for something and be willing to fight for what they stood for. I am not seeing that now.
I teach History for a living, and I'm seeing so many parallels between our country now and Weimar Germany in the 1930s that it scares me. Trump will not stop; nor will his Republican enablers like Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell. They will not stop, so must be stopped. Every day the Democrats delay makes Trump stronger.
If Mrs. Pelosi won't lead, then she should get out of the way for someone who will.
584
@Vesuviano
"I am so disgusted...that I am seriously considering re-registering as an independent."
This is precisely why we must move to impeach. All this fear of consequences will only fragment voters.
40
@Matthew Cherry Congresional Democrats took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, not the Demoicratic Party. The Republicans have made it abundantly clear that they have no respect for constitutional norms, liberal democracy, or the rule of law. Failing to impeach Trump, whether or not the Senate votes to convict, will only further empower a lawless Republican party to destroy what is left of the American republic. Every time Nancy Pelosi announces that Trump will face no consequences for his lawless behavior, she emboldens him to become even more lawless.
18
Continuing (partial list) * Launch a new matching-fund program to support House candidates who agree to raise only small-dollar. contributions and update the public financing program. * Eliminate "sidecar" superPACs that support individual candidates. * Require the presidents and vice president to release their tax returns. * Required the presidents-elect to have an ethics plans for their transition teams and file financial disclosures within 30 days of taking office. * Bar House members from serving on corporate boards and forbid them from using taxpayer money to pay penalties for employment discrimination. * Require the Supreme Court to establish its first-ever code of ethics. * Expand laws regulating foreign and domestic lobbying.
https://democracyreform-sarbanes.house.gov/sites/democracyreformtaskforce.house.gov/files/HR%201_TheForthePeopleAct_FINAL.pdf
12
I would have to say that the Civil War examples only prove that it's extremely difficult, given the "fog of war," to know what cards your enemy is holding, even if the situation seems abundantly clear in hindsight.
If McClellan had known for a fact the relative weakness of the confederate forces, he probably would've made a different decision. But he didn't know the facts. All he had were educated guesses--which turned out to be wrong.
Right now, we can't know for a fact what the political fallout from impeachment proceedings would be. We have nothing but educated guesses. The only thing we know for certain is that the Republican Senate would guarantee that impeachment would not be successful in removing Trump from office. So it's not all that surprising that Democrats seem to feel that impeachment would be little more than a symbolic gesture with unknowable political consequences, and thus are reluctant to move forward.
For the record, I believe Congress should impeach. Yes, it would be a symbolic gesture, but symbols can be profoundly important. In this case, impeachment would reaffirm the rule of law and the separation of powers, and if that's not a hill to die on, I don't know what is.
But let's not pretend Democrats are holding an obvious advantage they are afraid to press. Like the Civil War, this is a complicated fight, and outcome is far from certain.
427
@Joe M. I can only remind you that NO impeached President has ever been removed from office, so the reasoning that impeachment should not be approached unless the offender can be successfully removed from office is a red herring. You impeach because the facts demand it be done regardless of whether the Senate will approve of conviction. You either stand for rule of law, or you cave.
175
@Joe M.It is indeed a complicated fight, and the outcome far from certain. But I, an independent, consider the stakes to be just as high. The actions of the current POTUS represent an existential threat to the rule of law and the future of the US as a democracy responsive to the will of the people. Further, the attacks from authoritarian countries upon our electoral process is as much an existential threat to our democracy as any events of the Cold War. I believe the parallel drawn by this opinion piece is that he who hesitates is lost.
@Richard: True. But Nixon, by any standard a less corrupt POTUS than the current occupant of the Oval Office, fled before he could be impeached. The results of that impeachment were a foregone conclusion, as would be the results of this one.
25
@Joe M.
Good point about "fog of war", but history's verdict on McClellan is that he was overly cautious. A general still has to "win" in spite of the "fog of war".
15
If Ms. Pelosi is worried about rallying trump's base, she is too late. Ditto "dividing the country". His base is as solid as it will ever get, and the last time we were so divided (unable to even agree on what is reality, let alone address it) was in the decade before the Civil War. We know how that was resolved (if it actually was).
In the meantime, the chance to actually expose the multiple levels of corruption in this combination of kleptocracy and kakistocracy through an impeachment inquiry (which is the best and perhaps the only way to penetrate the wall of refusal erected by trump --- itself an impeachable high crime) remains unused.
The "lesson" drawn from the Clinton impeachment is inapt. Clinton original offense was a personal and relatively minor act (in the context of state affairs) and his coverup was one with which many could empathize --- and to begin with he was much more personally liked than trump could ever be. trump's already evident offenses are multiple, obvious, criminal in every sense, and his entire course is a threat to the Constitution, the stability of international relations,, the continued viability of our natural world, and the very notions of truth and simple decency, so basic to civilization. Clinton was none of these things.
We should also note that on the day Richard Nixon resigned rather be impeached and convicted (an act of integrity for which he should be recognized) his approval was still in the mid-twenties.
630
@jprfrog
The only important lesson from the Clinton impeachment is that independent voters were turned off by the waste of time and initiative that the impeachment represented for the Republicans. Clinton did not gain in popularity because he was a predatory horndog; the Republicans lost popularity because they failed. Republican true believers supported the Clinton impeachment as much as Democratic true believers support a Trump impeachment. Both were guilty of indulging in self-righteous virtue signalling for their base at the price of greater cynicism and loss of support by independents.
8
@jprfrog
the negative effects of the Clinton impeachment on the democratic party is Republican revisionist history. The democrats did fine in the two successive elections.
21
Trump is looking and action like a mob crime boss every day yet the Republicans do nothing.
At least Democrats are not just completely ignoring Trump, Barr and McConnell's complete and utter disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law. Impeachment should start today and every legal means should be used to contain the complete madness that has consumed our country.
16
"Lesson One: Don’t let Trump take the initiative."
The entire messaging organization of the Democratic Party The should be fired. The party has been doing great things. However when it comes to messaging, they couldn't convince the average person to breathe!
2
The upper hand point is not clear. The democrats can investigate, but it is not clear that the public will not grow weary of it or that Trump will not be able to turn it into some kind of "victimization" message for his base and for independents.
The State by State polls imply that, if held today, the democrats have not clinched this election. They must proceed with caution and not use the Impeachment word nor the "Constitutional Crisis" message. They have their base and don't need extra language. The Constitutional Crisis occurs after a complete court review, the determination of which subpoenas and contempt charges stick, and the defiance of court ordered compliance with subpoenas. Then, and only then do we have a Constitutional Crisis
1
As much as I want this horrid character out of the White House (along with his revolting henchmen, Miller and Bolton), I have to look to the third most powerful leader for guidance through this terrible time in our history. We may not like Nancy Pelosi' s reluctance, but at this time, this is all we've got. I think she knows the score, and without support from the Senate, whatever she does will bear nought. And failure to complete the impeachment (not to mention apprehension) will indeed solidify the crazed base of what's left of the Republican Party. We cannot let Trump win, and if it means hunkering down for another year, then so be it.
1
If the Democrats are going to be effective, the individual independent actors need to be brought in to a coordinated action plan. Everyone doing their own thing is not going to best Trump and his minions. Trump has declared war. And, he believes in playing a zero sum game - he wins, you lose. The Speaker needs to gather her lieutenants and the heads of the major committees to develop a plan of battle. It is Tyranny v. Democracy.
7
Speaker Pelosi should take advice from General Grant: “I intend to fight it out on these lines if it takes all summer.”
2
It is disgraceful that the Democrats are not doing their duty of exposing the lawless president who is not protecting and defending the constitution as he swore before the "biggest ever inauguration crowd". He is still campaigning on locking Hillary up for her emails when his daughter and son-in-law have committed the same offenses about private servers. Even though the Senate will never vote to remove the president it would be worthwhile to tie him up with hearings and requests for evidence. He has proven that when given a choice, he always lies even when there is video documentation to prove otherwise. The GOP will be hardpressed to excuse his perjury. They won't act on it, but maybe some of his blind followers will notice he is a criminal.
7
I'm struck by the comments echo chamber NYT articles about impeachment provoke. Save for occasional "Hillary did it" kicks, most demand impeachment. Pelosi's caution is more complex. Had Trump's team cracked, and admitted they knew about Russian coordination, we would be talking treason. They didn't, so we're talking obstruction.
Nixon's impeachment papers start with obstruction, but to the public it was about break-ins, hacks, and other criminal acts they understood. Obstruction is much less motivating.
I read this article expecting a discussion of Andrew Johnson's impeachment. Johnson's was political, his effort to undo reconstruction.
The country was split over reconstruction, as today it's split by partisanship. So Johnson squeaked by. There's a good chance Trump will too.
Civil War strategy? Once Union generals understood they had numerical and mechanized superiority, they acted like it. Democrats today outnumber Republicans, and live in wealthier, more productive states. They'd win a war between the two parties.
But politics is different. There's gerrymandering, electoral colleges, Census undercounting. Dems need to control government to change rules, and reduce partisanship.
Teapot Dome is the history we need reminding of, now. Its 2 consequences: Congress can compel testimony, and see the President's taxes. Harding died in office, or would have been impeached.
6
The Democratic leadership fears “the Trump base,” MAGA nation; that’s why they’re hesitant to act.
The president has successfully constructed a grim mythology of support that has frozen his opposition with fright—Republicans who fear to gainsay him (being primaried and publicly shamed) and the loyal opposition party. It’s as though the president could somehow summon to his command the 35%-40% of the nation, upon whose support his tenure rests, to keep his scatterbrained administration afloat by a physical force of arms.
Not enough American citizens are grounded in either civics and/or history to appreciate how rare the process of impeachment is or how necessary it is when the facts—or at least incontrovertible allegations—prove beyond any reasonable doubt that a president is in serious violation of the Constitution.
It very much appears that this president has taken the bold initiative. But unlike either Andrew Johnson or Richard Nixon (Bill Clinton’s problems with the truth re: Monica Lewinsky don’t really apply here as he was not attempting to subvert the Constitution but to protect his reputation—an altogether different raison detre), Donald Trump is surely attempting to overturn a quarter of a millennium’s laws and customs because he thinks that he can succeed; he has both the Republican Senate and right-leaning Supreme Court able and willing to abet him, the views of the Chief Justice and his four guaranteed “yes” or “no” votes very much in his side.
He’s winning.
108
@Red Sox, ‘04, ‘07, ‘13, ‘18 -- "he's winning".
Can you imagine where the country would be today if the Republicans held on to their House majority last November? He's just getting started with making America over. Six more years of authoritarian rule and America will be more like Venezuela.
25
@Red Sox, ‘04, ‘07, ‘13, ‘18-Winning? Not so much. Trump is setting up the economy for a recession and more trouble on the horizon as he burns up alliances and insults and threatens America's long-time partners. Tariffs are hitting each household with what amounts to a tax hike; this on top of other rising costs. Moreover, the Republican base is shrinking and there are not sufficient registered voters to keep putting Republicans in office without GOP vote suppression and voter disenfranchisement tactics. As continuing investigations reveal that Trump has not only broken laws but committed acts treasonous to the U.S. and his Republican enablers (who have accepted Russian/foreign money handouts) are also compromised -- watch a massive shift as moderate, principled Republican voters bail out of the party and withdraw their support.
16
@Ann: By golly, I hope you’re right. The Republicans have broken away from decorum and decency. Seeing how they’ve abased themselves without paying a price at the polls, they’ve gone full speed ahead. It’s like they always feared to run across the street without wearing any clothes because they’d be ashamed at the spectacle; but now, they’re willingly risking it because they think no one cares. I recommend the 1953 film “War Of The Worlds,” the science fiction vehicle starring Gene Barry. The Republicans are like the aliens, obliterating all opposition with their green laser lights, leaving craters in their wake. I remain skeptical that enough Americans have enough love for their country to fight the Donald Trumps and the Mitch McConnells of the world. Look: 140-millions sat out 2016; where are they? Will they answer the call on 11/06/2020? I’d rather doubt it.
12
This is a brilliant analogy. The Democrats have been shell shocked and indecisive since Reagan, afraid of an imagined tidal wave of conservativism. Trump et. al. only have to bark to start Democratic hand wringing and cautionary scolding. Like Trump, Lee (a poor strategist) was recklessly aggressive. He was able to play McClellan like a banjo in the Peninsula and Antietam in spite of inferior numbers. Trump's base, perhaps the political offspring of the 30 odd % of Americans who still thought Nixon was doing a good job in 1974, are beyond reach. As Grant, Sherman, and G. Thomas knew, unite the many, seize the offensive, and attack relentlessly.
247
This is not a strategic decision, making it so is doing exactly what President Trump wants, he also wants to be put into the 'victim' role, so from his perspective he cannot lose. Therefore when he breaks the law you go after him, ALL in. It becomes a matter of integrity nothing else. I am no lawyer but you do need a 'smoking gun' and if all the news we read is accurate then define the smoking gun and get this nightmare started and finished. He thinks its a game. It is no game. A lot of Republicans think it is a game as well and will drag their feet all the way, hoping the economy stays well and they can make it through to the election and paint the Democrats as 'poor losers'. Do NOT think about winning or losing. Just do the right and that is the strategy, the tactics will follow.
9
Haven't the Republicans already shown that they care nowt for the Constitution? How much more proof do you need? And until they realize the error of their ways, impeachment is a fool's errand. Only the people can rid the country of this horrendous episode, and even half of them seem doubtful of their understanding. Apparently the trials and efforts of the previous 243 years means nothing to them.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep...
Yup, they forgot that too.
1
If not now, then when? If the Democrats led by Pelosi can't stiffen their spines and fight for the Constitution then we are all lost. If the Democrats wring their hands and worry about their "popularity" then what good were they to begin with? The GOP and Trump are cancers which need to be cut out and burned. Trumps base will never change, they've shown they are the worst that America has to offer, gullible, hateful, and undereducated to a disturbing degree. We can't let these people run this country into the ground any further than they already have. If the Democrats begin impeachment and the Senate blocks it, then use their refusal against them in the next election. "The Republican Party, the party for law breaking, lie telling, white power and hatred".
5
I am surprised you did not mention what happened to Andrew Johnson. He was tried and was not ousted by just one vote. He went on, after his presidency, to serve in the Senate.
However, what you need to write about on why was Andrew Johnson impeached? The reasons that led up to it, the politics of the times, etc. You may find that , in this, there is a lesson to both parties when you try to impeach a president in a very divided country.
"The U.S. House of Representatives votes 11 articles of impeachment against President Andrew Johnson, nine of which cite Johnson's removal of Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton, a violation of the Tenure of Office Act. "
Johnson did not obstruct justice, lie, cheat, steal, collude with a foreign power, etc. He removed Stanton, because he, and hard line GOP members, wanted to punish the south and make it pay dearly fro the Civil War.
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath.
Trump certainly exceeds both these standards to be impeached.
The Democrats are not doing their civic duty because they want to win an election. One has to wonder how much damage Trump, and the GOP, can do between now and January, 2021.
Certainly undermining the very foundations of the US Government qualifies as impeachment of Trump. And censure of a number of Republican Senate and House members.
8
Everything today seems to involve some political nuance. The Democratic majority House fears impeaching a corrupt and dangerous president because the Republican majority Senate won’t convict regardless of any evidence, and this will energize Tr*mp voters. Will this country ever get back to doing something because it’s the right thing to do?
2
As Lincoln told McLellan, the public is telling Congress: You MUST act.
If Trump's jaw-dropping lawlessness, corruption, and incompetence do not merit immediate impeachment, no president can ever be impeached.
The House must do its job. Until it does, both the President and the Senate escape responsibility.
7
The question is not if, but to how many crimes to impeach him /charge him. His efforts to obstruction of justice in multiple areas is mind boggling and daily event.
2
Successful impeachment requires conviction by the Senate. The Senate needs an overwhelming tsunami of evidence to overcome its reluctance to convict. Mueller and McGahn, our Deliverers from Evil in this, could conceivably provide it. They are trumps (no pun intended) after all; why Trump fears them so.
So where are Mueller and McGahn?
Both are Republican partisans. Therefore, one assumes, they also are “Institutionalists”, as was said about Attorney General Barr before he revealed his true colors as an enemy of the Republic.
Inexplicably, Mueller and McGahn seem complaisant, if not determined, to allow Trump to betray his oath of office (“to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic”), thereby destroying the very thing that all three men swore to preserve, protect and defend.
As does Senate Majority Leader McConnell and his Republican cohort, all struck deaf, dumb and blind when not wallowing in rank hypocrisy. A Senate composed of supposedly honorable men and women choose to paralyze that legislative body, rendering Congress — arguably the primary branch of our three co-equal branches of government — impotent; unable to check a runaway Executive Branch.
Everyone in a position to act decisively to end our national nightmare chooses to pretend that it isn’t happening. They either sit on their hands or actually aid and abet Trump as he slowly destroys the United States.
11
@Steve Singer the idea that the House should only impeach based on an imaginary future reading of the Senate's action is not only incorrect, but unimaginably sad for a belief in the rule of law in this country. You impeach because the president broke the law and continues to break the law. You do it because the law commands you to do it.
3
@Steve Singer. What’s an institutionalist? Labels do not help
@MEH-
In a nutshell, to the extent I understand it, an “Institutionalist” is a federalist, an elected or appointed public official who subordinates their personal and partisan political interests to the well-understood, long-established interests of the federal government office that he or she holds.
Attorney General Barr promised the Senate that he would subordinate his personal belief in an imperial presidency only to renege after winning confirmation. President Trump, of course, ignores his institutional obligations altogether. Senate Majority Leader McConnell has surrendered his responsibilities to the Senate and nation to pack courts with partisan jurists who will do the same.
Yes, it is useful to compare the Civil War with the war with Trump.
In Lincoln's Gettysburg Address of 1863, he ends:
"that this nation, under G-d, shall have a new birth of freedom..."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My sense is that Trump is provoking the nation to improve, now.
He is testing us, with his insane dictatorial moves, every day.
So, we should consider impeaching as a teaching, for our future.
The USA is a work in progress, still. Trump is testing us, daily.
As Leonard Cohen sang, "Democracy is coming to the USA."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(See the words of "Democracy" song, Leonard Cohen, 1992)
"Democracy is coming to the USA."
1
Is it possible that information revealed during the course of impeachment hearings would be so destructive to Trump that enough Senate Republicans would vote for impeachment? By refusing to act decisively short of a known, safe outcome, the House is hurting its chance to eliminate Trump for good and reassert their co-equal Constitutional power.
3
@Jean. Perhaps, but Republicans crave power over everything including the Constitution
1
@Jean So, begin impeachment in hopes the Democrats find the evidence? Most Americans, by this time, realize that Trump is a deeply flawed character. But, many also realize a lot of the drumbeat for impeachment is political theatre. Democrats following the GOP road map in its attempt to delegitimize Obama, albeit with more to work with.
1
Yes the lesson seems to be: Don’t shy away from appropriate action due to fear of the opponent’s possible strength. McClellan could have known better, as the South was known to have fewer resources overall than the North did, though the immediate relative advantage was not certainly known. The current confrontation with Trump has the House in a similar fear of consequences in proposed action, with the potency of the President’s presumed rejoining actions in some doubt but feared to be probably decisive in its ultimate effect, or so it is feared. This is the sort of caution and timidity that Lincoln warned and railed against, though he was feign to abrogate authority from the general he had entrusted it to in the moment. Lincoln’s declaratory admonition it appears, in the hindsight of history, to have been right, McClellan’s caution derailed an almost certain Union victory that would have been decisive, and avoided the long drawn-out struggle that subsequently obtained. The lesson is: to act decisively with your current seeming advantage, avoid second guessing yourself at a certain point of clarity, and charge ahead with purpose, victory being likely assured.
9
Excellent and interesting analysis. I do however see it differently. McClellan simply would not fight. It was not until Lincoln took notice of Grant that he saw he had the solder he needed. Grant saw that the North had superior numbers and machinery so he vigorously put them to use.
Looking at polls and the midterms Democrats do seem to have an advantage. The analogies differ however, in how to move forward. Many see the time and nastiness of an impeachment proceeding as more likely to squander the advantage of the Democrats. It is a near certainty that Republicans will not vote to impeach trump so a months long exhausting debate will not remove him, and the electorate with be dispirited/fractured. Grant would not press his case given these circumstances.
How a grandmother from California has become our new General Grant is an amazing story, but that is precisely where we are. We need to listen to her.
9
@PJM You are horribly wrong. Nancy Pelosi is the new Neville Chamberlain. Her policy of appeasement is profoundly foolish. Look at trump's behavior in the past two weeks--how he's now rejecting ALL oversight, subpoenas, etc. These are the moves of a dictator. By not acting strongly, she only emboldened him. She swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and she is NOT upholding it. History will not look well on her--if we have historians in the future, or any future at all.
1
@Cyntha Needless to say, I disagree. But in any case, time will tell. Meanwhile, I wonder how often the same person can be compared to Grant and Chamberlain!
The Congress must act. The evidence of obstruction is clear and mounting. Impeachment begins the real investigation, compiles the data, and shows the very deep treachery of this administration. In fact, we are in the midst of a civil war with the south led by Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, and John Cornyn just as were are in an information war with Russia. As always, the best defense is a strong offense against a Republican party so corrupt, so antithetical to their previously expressed beliefs, so bent on destruction of democracy that nothing will change their path. It is essential that the Republicans in the House and Senate are forced to show their true beliefs with a vote that will be heard around the nation. The Union can not function, will not function, if all future Presidents behave is this way. This has never been acceptable nor should it be now. Congress must never back down, especially when under assault, and must look deep within the soul of this nation to find the courage to move forward. Congress must act for the people, now.
21
If impeaching Trump is the right thing to do, it should be done, regardless of whether the Senate votes to convict him and regardless of the electoral consequences.
9
@Mark
Agreed, we need to stop this over analyzing and navel-gazing. The timing is the only question at this point, and I trust Pelosi's instincts.
2
For every overly cautious general, there was another who proved too hasty, so it's hard to draw too much from this.
A better reason to act is because it's the right thing to do. It's simple: the President committed crimes, some of them serious. He should be impeached, even with no expectation of removal by the Senate, because that's what's supposed to happen to a president who commits serious crimes.
16
Inaction will be fatal to the Dems and in the long run damaging to the country, perhaps fatally so.
The Constitution has given those opposing Trump's attempted authoritarian takeover one weapon and one weapon only - impeachment.
At stake is the system of checks and balances explained and touted in The Federalist Papers authored by John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton. Having considered political history from the ancient Greeks through the seemingly incessant European wars, our Founding Fathers gave reasons, compelling then as today, for the form of government they devised.
They weren't just theorists - they had to design the machine of government, then build it and make it run. It has served us well through mighty trials, the greatest being the Civil War to which Mr. Bouie draws analogy.
While those facts differ from the present situation, the common truth is clear. Time doesn't stand still; another year and a half of trampling on our government and its institutions, what will be the remains? And the cowed, long-suffering Democrats will be impotent.
Trump's illegality must be trumpeted before the American people by impeachment, irrespective of whether the Repubs remain unprincipled and spineless and fail to convict.
As Lincoln told McClellan we should tell the House of Representatives: You must act!
18
Sorry, but even if the House votes to impeach, the Senate will never convict. And if he were impeached, we would end up with Stepford Pence. No thanks. Let the House investigate, let the courts uphold the subpoenas and then get out and vote in 2020 and get rid of them all.
7
@Susan I'd actually take Pence for the remainder of this mess for two reasons. We already have Pence. He accomplishes his own agenda out of the spotlight of Trump's circus. Impeachment will give real teeth to the demands for documents, making it much harder for Trump to conceal his crimes.
Impeachment will never happen as long as the Republicans have control of the Senate. Pretty simple. All the Dems can do is to keep the pressure up and take their case to the courts. The Dems have to win the presidency and the Senate in 2020. Tall order. But Mitch has opened the nuclear option door. If the Dems could take the presidency and a simple majority in the Senate, then cloture is dead.
2
@steven smith. Impeachment happens in the House without Senate but for removal the Senate would be needed.
5
Strategically, it might make more sense to wait on impeachment until after the election.
Democrats campaigning for the Senate can promise to vote yes on Articles of Impeachment if elected.
If Trump is re-elected, and the Senate changes hands, you can be assured that Impeachment will follow.
If Trump is not re-elected, then Democrats will control the Senate, the House, and the Executive.
If Trump is re-elected and the Senate doesn't change hands, then Trump can still be impeached, and like Clinton, have that stain against his Presidency in perpetuity.
3
@Owat Agoosiam Strategically it might be better to wait on impeachment until during the campaign season.
@Robert David South The downside to waiting for the campaign season to start is that it opens Democrats up to charges that they are politicizing the impeachment process.
After the election, that charge will be much less valid.
You forgot to mention that McClellan's neglect of taking the offensive led to the war lasting 3 1/2 more years. Please Lord, allow the Democrats to take the offensive. Justice will be served. The day of reckoning will come.
44
@GraceNeeded
Thank you. I can't help adding this:
At the end of the three and a half years, the army that won the war was substantially African-American, and the character and meaning of the victory had changed. That was the victory that Andrew Johnson (one of the true Bad Men of American history) denied those who had fought and died for it.
The failure to impeach Johnson cost us the country this could have been if Reconstruction had succeeded. That failure of will led to the empowerment of Jim Crow terrorism in the South and the lapse into corruption of the Grant administration. I know I'm being overly simple here, but when people declare pompously that Impeachment will never succeed, they forget that it's the only corrective our founding document supplies for bad men like Andrew Johnson and Donald Trump, and until it is used and succeeds, we will always have more of them.
5
@Tim
And to think that JFK, in "Profiles in Courage," lionized the Senator who cast the deciding vote against removal of Andrew Johnson.
It is the greatest possible cowardice and abrogation of duty for Democrats to shrink from impeachment.
Trump is spreading his divisive filth; the GOP is his entirely, and they will do no more than they have: that is, rally behind their new autocrat and pay homage.
We have only one chamber of the legislature from which to counter his mortal threat to our nation: impeach and investigate. If you will fail us now, you were never worth electing in the first place. Do the right thing, and trumpet it to the nation; those who can be convinced with facts, will be convinced, and the rest were never possible to bring into the fold. For the sake of our democracy, please stand up.
24
Errr...there was a time when the NY Times was eagerly jumping on the "Trump should prosecute Hillary" bandwagon? Remember the "Room for Debate" from 2016: "Should President Obama Pardon Hillary Clinton?" The sudden about-face on Trump's behavior towards his political opponents (just fine in 2016; a threat to democracy in 2019) weakens your argument.
1
@Heather
‘Remember the "Room for Debate" from 2016: "Should President Obama Pardon Hillary Clinton?"’
Neither author of that article was Jamelle Bouie. The NYT is not a monolith, you can’t group all of the opinion writers together. Certainly you can’t group, say, David Brooks and Paul Krugman together.
And while I don’t think much of the assumptions in the article, “that weakens your argument” doesn’t really follow. They’re about completely different things, even if I feel that Trump’s behavior then was also reprehensible. It’s not an example of double standards, changed reasoning, or hypocrisy, indicating an argument in bad faith.
1
@Heather That's a very colored reading of the article you cite. Note in particular the statement " Pardoning Clinton would normalize the practice and dull the (already weak) incentive for future presidents to exercise self-restraint."
The president, by a pretty general consensus among those not intransigently self-deluded, is at a minimum triable on numerous charges of high crimes and misdemeanors. If the House now fails to impeach him, they are abrogating their constitutional responsibility and imperiling our democracy. The world today provides all too many horrific examples of what an unchallenged and criminal presidency would bring us to.
7
How many more cards does one need than the information in the Mueller inquiry and the subsequent ongoing attempts to obstruct justice?
What will it take to turn the Democrats into verterbrates?
7
It’s depressing how little appreciation there is for the law, until the time comes when you really need the law to work.
Good thing so much of America is educated on criminal procedure from poorly written television shows.
Innocent until proven guilty? Hasn’t anyone ever heard of Rikers Island?
4
Impeachment is a process by which Congress can have oversight over the executive, but more importantly it is a vote whereas all are then put on record for their stances.
THAT is the key. (for a winning strategy)
Who, out of any of you know where any individual Representative stands on a whole host of issues such as firearm controls, climate change initiatives, a woman's right to choose, fair progressive taxation, repealing, strengthening, or replacing the Affordable Care act with Single Payer of some sort, withdrawing troops from the Middle East, and so on, and so on and so on ?
Having trouble figuring out where your Representative stands, or even who they are ?
The government/Congress, for too long has been working behind the scenes making back room deals, where if there is a vote, it is a foregone conclusion. (or even a voice vote)
It is time for all Statesmen/people to stand up, be counted and let the American electorate see where they stand, so that they can let them know where they stand. (and vote accordingly)
Time for Democracy to see the light of day.
11
@FunkyIrishman This is exactly what the House should be doing right now. Getting everybody on record where they stand. Pass reasonable bills and force the Republicans in the Senate to go on record blocking them. At the right time, force the president to stand trial and Republican senators to vote against impeachment. All at critical times when they are running for re-election. Two can play dirty.
2
@Robert
I think you are proving me point with your last line (but I do wholeheartedly agree with the rest)
Regular order AND just following the rule of law (oversight designated explicitly in the Constitution) wherever it may led (even to the White House door) is NOT ''playing dirty''. It is just doing the ''regular'' job that the founding fathers laid out, and what people were elected to do.
I would like to see some Democracy in action.
4
Yes, we are in a 2nd Civil War, but instead of a Lincoln in The White House we have a modern-day Jefferson Davis with his "nullification" of the Constitution. And instead of McCellan we have overly cautious Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Trump has already "self-impeached" with his blatant (see part II of the Mueller report) and continuing obstruction of justice [aka "the rule of law"] and stands as an accused felon [aka "Individual-1"] by the Southern District of New York for an election fraud conspiracy for which his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, has pleaded guilty and is now in jail. The Constitution is under siege and now is the time to go on offense to defend it. If you want to save our democracy and the republic, you have no choice but to enforce its laws and begin the process of hearings on impeachment as the Constitution demands. Anything else, is retreat from battle against the Trump autocracy. Yes I know, the rebel forces have already captured the Senate under Kentucky Col. Mitch McConnell. But the Democrats must take the fight directly to the American people to vote to impeach in November 2020. It's the only way we can hope that "government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth."
12
When there are folks who are fence-sitting, looking to see where the "troops" are heading - are they hesitant and retreating, or taking the battle to the enemy? - they may decide to contribute or not.
If you don't take the chance and doing what is the right thing, others may choose to avoid that battle. But if you decide to do the right thing, others may join you in the fight.
One of my kids' favorite books is about addressing a bully in a cafeteria when the bully is picking on a smaller child. The protagonist steps up and says "stop it". The bully responds gruffly. The protagonist says it again louder, and then is joined by all the other kids tired of seeing the bully push everyone around. Life is like that.
Donald Trump is the bully. He'll fade into the background when he knows he's outnumbered. Right now, he's counting on our fear and indecision.
Do you want my vote? Then do the right thing. Our Democracy is worth the fight.
55
@historyRepeated
The bully in your children's book does not have the legitimacy of an election and the authority of public office. It is fanciful to think that Donald Trump, a politician who derives his political power from shocking the establishment and public norms, would somehow go away if we shouted at him to "stop it."
Doing the right thing in politics requires doing the most effective thing. Impeachment is not an effective way of removing the president from office, therefore, it's not the right thing to do.
1
@Michelle
I agree that impeachment isn't the most effective thing, voting him out his. However, two more years of hand-wringing just encourages him. You go after bullies, not around them. Shouting "stop it" won't. Holding Trump account for his actions detailed in the Mueller report, among other things, and forcing both Houses to be on record makes it clear who is actually holding what position. I don't care necessarily if the Senate convicts. I do care that we kowtow to a bully. I was a small kid picked on and humiliated by big bully in school. One day I had enough after he sucker punched me and went after him with everything I had. I lost the fight, but fought hard. That idiot never went near me again, and the bullying moved on to other kids too afraid and stopped all together a year later when scoliosis put him in a back brace.
There are many ways to say "stop it".
I advocate for Congress to step into the fray and not flinching in it's duties as a co-equal branch of government. Otherwise, we're signaling surrender.
What do you advocate and why? You didn't say.
1
This article like all the impeachment talk only considers half of the process. Sure the house can start the process and make a very strong case against Trump but the Senate, lead by Trump's boy Mitch, will never convict so what's the point.
5
"Democrats have the upper hand, but they aren’t acting like it. Yes, they have taken action against the president — that’s why he has fought to stymie their investigations. But the logic of their arguments and accusations leads to impeachment, and there, they have flinched, worried that the public — or at least Republican voters — will rally to his side."
Either something is right, or it isn't. That's it in a nutshell. By focusing on the political impact, Democrats appear weak, and calculating, as if the decision to begin impeachment hearings in and of itself would drive away potential voters.
That argument makes zero sense to me. Trump voters will vote for him again, period.
They should listen to their constituents instead of each other. Most people I know are clamoring to begin the process. It doesn't matter if he wouldn't be convicted, but it does matter if Democrats don't stand by their convictions.
Either he has broken the law or he hasn't. Of course he has, and he continues to obstruct Congress as if they were fleas he's flicking off his wide, long red tie.
Democrats: if you don't do this, you're surrendering. I'd rather my party go down fighting than not fight at all.
52
Facts will come out at the impeachment trial that are not now available to us. They may be much worse than what we already know. Let's get the articles of impeachment drafted and served.
34
I disagree with your analysis.
Forget about impeachment during the Civil War. Be both cautious but yet decisive like Lincoln Was during his presidency in general.
He went slow, legal, cautious in relation to union and slavery but never wavered on either one.
When he saw he had to do it or could do it then he acted.
Let the House dems go thru their oversight with hearings etc., maybe even contempt or fines but don't impeach until they are convinced enough republicans in the Senate will convict and also the American people are clearly in favor of it.
Otherwise it will most likely fail and will look like overkill to republican and independent voters, which the dems need. Wait for the system to get rid of Trump in 2020 or if all else fails, he will be term limited.
3
Congress must first investigate, with or without republican participation. If they cannot investigate without opening impeachment proceedings, then that's what they must do. To do anything less risks alienating the democrat base and the future of our democracy. They must assume the worst about this republican administration and proceed accordingly.
37
Impeachment in the face of criminal acts and a massive national security threat is not just the right thing to do, but the public supports it, even before impeachment hearings. A Reuters/Ipsos poll out a couple days ago shows a plurality supporting impeachment - 45% v. 42% opposed.
Failing to act shows weakness, which makes Trump stronger. It is infuriating to watch Democrats dither in the face of a president who clearly criminally obstructed an investigation into an attack on the foundation of our democracy, an election, by a hostile foreign power. And at least welcomed the help, and likely conspired with Russia. That sounds a lot like treason - maybe not by the narrow legal definition, but certainly the way most understand it - as a betrayal of one's country. It is past time for Democrats in Congress to act.
13
Politically, I agree with Mr. Bouie. Rhetorically, I have some difficulty with the Civil War analogy. First, likening speech, legislation, and government oversight to warfare increases animosity in our already divided public. Second, for many reasons, the Civil War is surrounded by rhetorical disputes; if one is arguing for a clear course of action--morally or strategically--this is not the best example available. Third, the reason Democrats should impeach is not to win a battle against enemies. They should impeach because rooting out corruption is in their job description. "Right" and "Wrong" are not political parties or warring factions; they are values we are all meant to share.
6
When the US Supreme Court backs up Congress, as it must, and should trump flout the Supreme Court then Congress must impeach. While the typical trump voter may vilify the Congress, I believe they will respect the Court’s reminder that no president is above the law.
The Constitution applies to everyone or it means nothing at all.
8
Congress must impeach. It's the right thing to do. Not impeaching sends a message to future presidents that you can ignore congress and act like a king.
15
It is probably a waste of time, but the House has the Constitutional duty to impeach.
13
Action vs. inaction, with unknowable consequences. That's life for all of us when we are faced with big decisions. Democrats have the "middle way" of waging a siege war by continuing the various oversight investigations as best they can to chip away at his credibility. By the time of the general election campaign, the Democratic nominee can call him "Crooked Donnie" and lead chants of "Lock him up!" They can even ask Russia and Wikileaks to find his recent tax returns and Deutsche Bank files. But Democrats have a powerful ally: the free press. They should feed the Times and WaPo investigative teams every tidbit they have to follow up at home and abroad. There are prinicpled whistleblowers in every business who can provide the press documents and evidence that Congress can't get anytime soon. Trump has made the news media "the enemy of the people" and endangered their reporters' lives for pursuing the truth. I think they would be more than willing to prove the power of the press between now and election day.
8
The Democrats have to constantly remind people that Trump is like Nixon. He was popular, but paranoid. He won the election, but that wasn't enough. He was obsessed with diminishing his opponents who he called enemies. The press was his enemy. Sound familiar?
They also have to remind the public that while Nixon didn't order the brake in, he did try and cover it up. That's a crime and classic obstruction of justice.
Trump tried to cover up anything that might be found by Mueller. He conspired to cover up his campaign finance violations, which is a felony.
He tried to get his lawyer to lie. He threatened a witness (Cohen).
And like Nixon he tried to block congressional access to documents that are legally part of their investigation.
Witnesses need to carefully lay out the legal standards for these offenses and then carefully marshal the evidence.
As they proceed that should ask the people to judge whether they have met a probable cause standard for charging the president.
That's what impeachment is a charge that the president has violated his office and should face those charges before congress.
Turn congress into a courtroom and the nation into a jury. Clinton was guilty, but the senate didn't think the nature of the crime warranted removal. Let's see if they feel the same about Trump's list of charges that is far more extensive than Clinton's.
19
Impeaching Trump will not lead to his removal from office unless 20 Republican Senators vote to convict, a very unlikely scenario given the GOP's lack of backbone. An acquittal would allow Trump to claim victimhood and exoneration once again and perhaps alienate the few Midwestern swing voters who will decide the outcome of the election and who then may vote for him again. Nancy Pelosi realizes that impeachment would play right into Trump's hand, morally justified though it may be. Realpolitik is not always pretty, but Pelosi is very well versed in this, and I defer to her judgement.
11
@Juvenal
Similar prospects did not stop Clinton's impeachment (conviction in Senate requires 2/3 vote. There were 45 Democrats, all of whom voted against conviction (along with a handful of Republicans). It was clear all along that his conviction was highly unlikely.
Note: these are two separate, procedures (impeachment and conviction). Whether or not to impeach should not be driven by fear/predictions that conviction is unlikely.
4
@Juvenal If the impeachment is properly timed it will hurt the Republicans first and there won't be time for the backlash before the election. They should do it during the primaries.
The biggest lesson the Democrats can learn from the Civil War in general is to pick the winning side - the Republicans which as we all know was the party of Lincoln.
Your usage of lawlessness when referring to the President is over the top. Fact is he has participated in the investigation day-one. Look.....is he my choice? No......but you gotta get over this obsession with impeachment. It's counter-productive and will never happen.
Get over it!
3
@Steve Your reference to the Republicans as the "party of Lincoln" is over the top. The republican party of today bears no relationship to the republican party of that time. Pretty sure we all know that.
72
@Marta - Today the Republicans are the "Party of Jefferson Davis." Not even Ronald Reagan would be welcomed in the GOP.
8
@Steve, so you know better than the 300+ prosecutors, many of them Republicans, who say Trump's conduct as reported by the Mueller Report warrants multiple felony charges? It may be cool with you that the president is a crook, but if Congress doesn't do its duty and impeach him, it will be like saying the Constitution simply doesn't matter.
4
To the Honorable Nancy Pelosi: Ya know what ya find in the middle of the road of cowardly indecision?
8
Trump is hosting the authoritarian leader of Hungary today and our ambassador to Hungary a longtime confident of Trump said that Trump wishes to rule America the same way as he does. Trump like all wanna be dictators wants to crush the free press, jail his opponents and control the information the American public hears. Trump is wrong often on major issues and he lies frequently but that is the game he is playing make people doubt the truth and reality so he can be the sole source. Trump is testing the limits of what he can get away with from sending Giuliani to Ukraine to interfere in our upcoming elections and asking Barr to investigate Biden .Most Americans don't know what it is like to live under a fascist regime with a nasty dictator using secret police to crush his opponents and destroy democracy the enemy of Trump.
43
Far more important than learning about the Civil War is understanding what misdemeanor means in high crimes and misdemeanor.
Misdemeanor meant then is exactly what it means now and that it is not big things that requires the removal of Donald J Trump from the highest office in your land but all those little things that roil your nation causing anxiety, depression and what Carter called malaise and caused you to once elect Reagan who began your decline and now Trump who looks to finish the destruction.
11
@Montreal Moe
It is indeed ironic when the next Edward Gibbon comes around to write the next Decline and Fall he or she may well begin with Iran/Contra and end with Iran and the enlightened world.
1
Excellent article. Thank you.
7
Bravely cast, like Lincoln's admonishment of General McClellan before Manassas and Richmond in 1862. But who are the infantry troops you would have Pelosi send against the entrenched Trumpians with the 'high ground' of all the federal agents defying the subpoenas of the House?
What exactly do you see as the Democratic advantage? Begin impeachment hearings ... lasting months? Isn't that a 'siege' by another name?
Unlike 1862's scene, today there is a deadline hanging over all: elections of 2020. What is begun in 2019 must be conclude before then One answer has to be that the nearly 30 investigations pending against Trump and company will likely take longer and have to be continued in a new Congress.
Let that be the infantry in this protracted campaign. The historic prospect of those has to be a given in the coming effort to renew the Democrats' hold on the House.
Before those skirmishes can be completed, there is something the House can do right away. Declare the House's sense of what is publicly known about Trump's exploitation of Russia's help, first, and then his many efforts (ten episodes in Mueller's Report) to thwart that bipartisan inquiry.
In the form of a Declaration of Censure of the President for his failures to support and defend the Constitution and faithfully execute the laws of the land. The banner of fidelity to the office of Congressmen and women would ride over the coming fray of the next election.
Lincoln's message at Gettysburg our model.
6
is djt's base of supporters really big enough to cause concern?"
will ANYONE outside his fan club, even consider voting for him?
1
@bob lesch
I think DJY should be impeached, not for the Russia silliness but because he's refusing to comply with subpoenas.
But that said there is a risk that impeachment will energize his base and switch over some voters in the Midwest.
@bob lesch Yes. His fan club is in the high 30s percent and another ten percent are traditional republicans and conservatives who will happily vote for him to maintain power. The Dems need everybody else.
I've used the analogy of Pelosi & McClellan before. Pelosi is more worried about political effects on her & her cohorts than about principle & her oath to the Constitution. It is time for the Pelosi wing of the party to recognize that they must make way for the younger "Grants" & "Shermans," willing to engage the Republican party & not let Trump off the hook every time we turn around. The Union was lucky to have Abraham Lincoln as its Commander-in-Chief &, aware of McClellan's lack of will to do battle with Lee, replaced him. In the Democratic party, there is nobody to force Pelosi & her antediluvian corporate-funded, middle of the road, neo-liberals out & replace them with true fighters.
Jim Hightower, a Democrat from Texas, once observed "The middle of the road has nothing but yellow stripes & dead armadillos." Add to that, a Trump victory in 2020 - or at least a close enough election for Trump & his supporters to cry the election was rigged (Irony of ironies!) & refuse to recognize his defeat. Pelosi is doing Trump's work for him.
"Moderation? It's mediocrity, fear, and confusion in disguise. It's the devil's dilemma. It's neither doing nor not doing. It's the wobbling compromise that makes no one happy. Moderation is for the bland, the apologetic, for the fence-sitters of the world afraid to take a stand. It's for those afraid to laugh or cry, for those afraid to live or die. Moderation...is lukewarm tea, the devil's own brew."
-- Dan Millman
4
Unfortunately, despite the obvious need to impeach Trump the Senate is controlled by a party that is utterly corrupt and not interested in reigning in a criminal "president." They have abdicated their constitutional responsibilities in order to gain total control of the government against the desires of the actual majority of the American People. This is part of a coup by the Repubs to use an obvious criminal to gain power. They will not give that up because they do not care one bit about the future of the USA. The Dems can do whatever they want. The corrupt Senate will protect the Liar in Chief. Nothing will change until the corrupt Repubs are voted out of the Senate.
10
Absolutely.
It's called "speaking truth to power."
Instead, Democratic leaders are attempting to hold some illusory middle ground that will lead to safety and security, as if still believing in Santa Claus--or hoping we do.
Conflict resolution requires becoming engaged in the conflict by supporting the values and needs which are not being cared for.
How can you "arrive home" without actually taking those steps in that direction?
It's as if the Democratic leadership sees middle ground, less offensive (read "strategic") philosophies leading us to the best product to sell. Empty calories.
7
The strategy for 2020 should be informed by 2016 as much as 1862.
Across three states, had a mere 80,000 voters--about half a percent of what was already a large winning popular majority --not decided to skip voting in 2016, Democrats today would be fending off the latest round of Benghazi hearings.
In 2016, voters who were unenthused chose to skip the poll or waste their vote on a third-party. They "couldn't stand either candidate/party/choice" or threw away their vote on Ralph or Jill or whomever as a protest.
So let's do get back to Benghazi, not as hearings but as a reminder: should the less interested, less engaged, "low information" (a charitable descriptor if ever I read one) voters see nothing but impeachment in the news, they might make the same choice they did in 2016 and let the 40% have the Electoral College to themselves.
That is exactly what Individual-1 is counting on happening.
3
@Stuart then this country as presently constituted will end - and rightfully so.
3
Great read but I disagree. In the Civil War there were two sides. The political landscape today has three. Democrats, Republicans & Undecideds. The middle of the road is crowded. Republicans who hate Trump but will not side with the party that is increasingly becoming pulled toward Socialism. Democrats who do not want to be pulled hard left but like being employed and seeing tax breaks and a growing 401k. The group in the middle is the real battleground. Who will run when the cannons fire and in which direction. A lot hinges on the Democrat candidate, many of whom will push this mass into the arms of Trump. How many can avoid the siren song of the bell ringing on the till? Prosperity is intoxicating.
5
"Look before you leap" vrs "He who hesitates is lost." On balance, what will compel Trump Administration allies and/or subordinates to comply with subpoena material submission/testimony mandates within a impeachment forum? Who in the Justice Department will enforce punitive action for those who refuse to comply? Either way, the issue will wind up in protracted legal proceedings. Better for Congress to get that ball rolling as soon as possible than providing this so-called president a impeachment-persecution vehicle he can drive into 2020.
5
Unclear what the Democrats have to lose from a rapid impeachment knowing full well he will not be removed from office. I guess the fear is the democrats cannot do that and select a candidate for the next election.
1
@Michael Cohen, the fear is that if Trump is acquitted in the Senate he will use that to claim the complete exoneration the Mueller Report does not provide, and he will have his "proof" that it was all a witch hunt. Remember, he's already got a base who believe everything he says -- he just has to convince some independents it was all a politically motivated charade. The Dems come by their skittishness honestly -- if they choose wrong and we get another Trump term, our democracy may be lost, and this time they'll take the blame for it.
@Mark
Even if he is acquitted in the Senate, information, such as the full, unredacted Mueller report will be revealed which would not be available otherwise.
The House would still be able to use its subpoena power to obtain information which could be damaging to his reelection campaign.
1
Winning in this case is impeachment and removal from office. Impeachment is relatively easy, and removal is highly unlikely. That is not an overestimate of the enemy; victory is hard to conceive. The prize for winning, by the way, is not the end of the war but a replacement of Trump by Pence, who might well be a stronger candidate for re-election. There is no end to the political war.
.
It basically comes down to how the Democrats want to spend the next year and a half. It can be impeachment hearings, an impeachment, a trial in the Senate, and eventual acquittal, or Democrats can craft legislation to show America how they would govern if given the chance while blocking any Trump extremism. The former may make this columnist and many other party stalwarts feel all warm and self-righteous, but political independents will dismiss both parties as useless time- and money-wasters if we spend a year on an unsuccessful impeachment.
.
I don't think Bouie would make a very good general. Task #1 is to appreciate the bigger picture, and to focus your efforts where they will yield the greatest gains. A good general doesn't waste his time in virtue signalling.
10
@Tom Meadowcroft
"It basically comes down to how the Democrats want to spend the next year and a half. It can be impeachment hearings, an impeachment, a trial in the Senate, and eventual acquittal, or Democrats can craft legislation to show America how they would govern if given the chance while blocking any Trump extremism."
They can, and should, do both, concurrently.
2
If the Dems do not impeach on grounds of political expediency that would be an abdication of their duty to the Constitution. Then both the president and the Congress would be turning away from the foundation of the country. These choices cannot be made with impunity. Causes have effects, and if we lie to ourselves, and to others, then we cannot expect to find truth and reality whenever we happen to want them.
18
So the lesson is that battle was lost by his not acting, but the war was won anyway.
2
The 1924 law is still the law. It is available and should be used. Unfettered force must be met with available force.
Whether the Lincoln-McClellan example is totally the answer to the Democrats' dilemma may be arguable, because today's situation is different from Lincoln's.
But timidity will not win Fair Maiden or the conflict with President Trump.
What use the law if it is not used when needed?
Doug Giebel, Big Sandy, Montana
22
Impeachment is the only course of action left open to Congress.
23
Mr. Bouie should affirm whether he has in fact read the Mueller Report, in full. This column does not align with the (much awaited) Mueller Report.
It's too bad there is no process for retroactive impeachment - since all of the Russian Collusion (as alleged) took place under the ineptitude of the prior Administration, led by President Obama.
1
@Maurice Gatien, have you read the Mueller Report? The FBI started investigating the Trump campaign's dalliance with the Russians as soon as they became aware of it. To suggest that it's Obama's fault that the Russians hacked American computers while Trump himself was egging them on is ludicrous. Trump knew that Russia was violating the law (that's why all of his people lied when confronted with it) and, instead of reporting it to law enforcement himself, actively encouraged them. Thanks to the Mueller Report, we know that the president is a criminal and a traitor. If we allow him to remain in office unchallenged, the Constitution will become so much toilet paper.
25
@Mark Hi Mark - to repeat my question - have YOU read the Mueller Report? I have - and it does not align with your bold statement that "we know that the President is a criminal and a traitor." Otherwise, Mr. Mueller would have recommended charges that aligned with the conclusion that "the President is a criminal." Mr. Mueller did not do that. It is hard to follow the logic on which you have based your conclusion.
Democrats in leadership are wary given how the party snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, both in the 2000 election and the 2016 election, and they are looking at the 2020 election with a very jaundiced eye. Twice bitten, thrice shy--even though the evidence, and the votes, are with them.
3
The Guardian News ran an opinion article by Robert Reich that succinctly shows why OUR U.S. House must pass a bill to impeach The Con Don. They MUST do it to clear the way to get all the information The Con Don is trying to block. It is their constitutional duty.
Readers can see Mr. Reich's excellent article here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/11/impeach-trump-house-checks-balances
To those who say we aren't in a Constitutional Crisis "yet" wake up. We are and WE THE PEOPLE want to PREVENT a Constituional breakdown and another civil war.
NOW is the time for ALL people in/with power in OUR United States of America and the world to join average people to prevent WW3 and more civil wars.
No one wins in war. No one. Not even the insatiably greedy 0.01% who are trying to start it. They will lose at the pearly gates if not before.
139
@njglea
As usual, Professor Reich hits the nail on the head. Now, can someone knock some sense into the Democrats?
11
@Michael
Exactly! At this point, Democrats
must focus on 2 things right now, simultaneously: Impeach Trumpenstein, and take action on addressing the impending “perfect storm” of climate change. We do not have the luxury of futzing around on everything else.
5
@njglea I read the article, seems to me that it urges Democrats to fall on their swords for the honor of the constitution... Really I rather get rid of trump the old fashion way by voting. Only a Democratic landslide can we even begin to rid our country of the trump taint. And the landslide won't come from trump voters, it won't come from the 42% that approve of him, it will come from getting out the vote. Moving to impeach will have an adverse effect on peoples desire to vote, it will be viewed as petty politics, it will do nothing but make the people who would already vote democratic happy and put off some that might have otherwise been persuaded.
2
With every day that passes we see more evidence that Trump is the fascist we feared, from welcoming Victor Orban into the White House, to prevailing upon his minions to break the law to avoid congressional oversight.
We have no alternative to impeachment.
Mr. Bouie is right--solving this problem requires that we take the initiative. We need to understand the source of his power (hint: American oligarchs) and cut it off at its base.
If the Mellons and Scaifes and Mercers and Kochs and Murdochs want to impose this kind of leadership on us, they must, first, know that we know what they're doing. And they must know that we won't tolerate it.
American industrialists have a long history with fascism, from their support of Hitler through various tin pot dictators in Latin America, through oil shrieks, and on and on.
103
A brilliant analogous analysis, Mr. Bouie! And it doesn’t end there, for just as Lincoln and the Union were attempting to defend and preserve the nation against the traitorous confederacy, today’s Democrats are faced with similar forces in the dastardly form of treasonous Trump and his Republican plotters. Let us hope and pray that they heed your advice, and prevent the country from going South once more!
16
Such wise words from Jamelle Bouie. I hope that drawing a parallel with a major figure in the Civil War helps the hesitaters see that action is required now. The words of Lincoln: "you must act" are relevant today. The House must act!
40
Something else you have to remember about McClellan. He ran against Lincoln as the Democratic candidate in 1864 after Lincoln removed him from his command. He lost handily. It wasn't just caution that animated McClellan in all this.
3
"Democrats want to maneuver around the president as if there’s another path to victory.
But there isn’t."
===
It is even more than that. Win or lose, the point is that Trump is out of control, is already grabbing power that he should not be allowed to have (does not legally have it), and is effectively turning the Presidency into a dictatorship. He has, as Pelosi has stated in so many words, proven his intent as well as his belief he is impeachable and truly ABOVE ALL LAW.
Put it another way, if the Democrats do not impeach, they will have lost more than the next potential Presidential election. They will have lost the United States of America. It will never be the same.
408
@DKM,
Thank you. Clear, concise and to the point. No time to weep, but to take action. By the way perhaps you have noticed that some of our most powerful voices are missing: Socrates, Rima Rigas, Walter Rhett, Ann from California, and more. They lend support and encouragement to those of us who have trouble explicating our sense of what is right for our country in peril.
20
Just think this through. Suppose Trump is impeached and then not convicted (and he won’t be). We still end up with the dictator in the White House.
1
@DKM, I agree. If Trump is not removed from office, I believe he will win in 2020 with massive vote fraud, crooked machines, suppression and other dirty tricks. He's got to go now. Impeach now and show the nation all of his and his gang's criminal evidence. Public opinon should do the trick and finish him off.
4
I would remind you that the objective is not to "send a message", or "rebuke Trump," it is "to remove Trump." Anything less than Impeachment & Removal, is a defeat and strengthens Trump's position ahead of the 2020 election. If the votes are not there in the Senate, then it is better by far never to start the process.
The votes are not there in the Senate to Remove Trump once he has been Impeached. Stop playing games and focus on what is important: Trump's defeat in the 2020 elections.
20
@Bruce1253
Agree completely. The result of the Mueller investigation was unsatisfactory for the most part, it took two years and left us with more questions than it answered. Do we really want to go through another year or more of all things Trump examined in minute detail by every newspaper and talking head on TV? We already know what he is. He and his enablers in Congress need to go, impeachment doesn't remove him from office and the discussions will just keep him front and center in the news until election day. This is what got him elected in the first place. I'm weary of this and I doubt most of the American public can remain engaged in another legal battle especially one that will come to nothing if we can't get him out.
I think Pelosi is right, we need to keep our eye on the prize which is the election in 2020, we have to win before we can legislate effectively.
3
@Bruce1253
Defending the Constitution is not a game. Refusing to defend the Constitution may be so characterized; however, if that is a game, it is a despicable one and probably one which will bring all too many more confused and desperate Americans over to the wrong side again in 2020.
4
@Dale Copps
It is a game if it does not produce results. This one will not.
1
I understand your concern about taking the initiative, but even if Trump is impeached, he will not be thrown out of office. So I don't know if the Civil War analogy quite works.
4
Yes! Democrats must act now!
I was recently heartened to hear that someone I know who has been a huge supporter of Trump is beginning to step away from Trump.
Trump's base at 42% will continue to diminish bit by bit.
32
"At this stage, when most Americans say they won’t vote for Trump in 2020, they have the public." Yes, they have the public, as they did in 2016, by three million votes. But do the Dems have the Electoral College. Two different things. You can win, and still lose, thanks to the EC, and this fact must be taken into consideration.
46
@Fast Marty
All the more reason to vociferously support the National Popular Vote movement in your state if it has not already passed legislation.
5
A key point about McClellen was that not long after his attempt to take Richmond, and then the inconclusive victory at Antietam, Lincoln removed him from command because of a loss of trust in his capabilities. I wish we could extend the McClellen analogy to Trump and have him removed, too.
12