Why was Hunter Biden paid $50,000/month to sit on a Board of an Electric Company when he has no background in electrical engineering or any aspect of electrical generation?
Why was the money routed through Cyprus?
Why was Joe Biden taped bragging about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor removed from office?
When Manafort did business in Ukraine he went to jail. When G. Craig did business in Ukraine he was investigated by the Justice Department. When Skadden Arpps did business in Ukraine they were dragged before the Mueller Committee. Where's the investigation of Hunter Biden?
Instead the investigation is of Trump? The President of the United States can't demand a foreign government investigate an issue which could compromise our security?
Foreign aid is withheld all the time. Do we have evidence of a quid pro quo or are you just connecting two events which may have no relationship to each other?
I didn't vote for Trump and I have no intention of voting for him this time but when do these hypocritical hysterias end? HRC destroyed 30,000 emails after she was subpoenaed and the Democrats wanted to impeach Trump for obstruction of justice because he threatened to fire someone he had every right to fire but didn't?
Now you want to accuse him of a crime because Biden's son did something clearly worth investigating and Trump demanded it be investigated?
No collusion-just move on to the next hysteria.
Trump won. Maybe try accepting it and defeat him on ideas this time?
20
Professor Yoo is totally wrong. The President has much too much power. The United States possesses and projects to much power. We need to be a leader, not a dictator. We very much need to weaken the Imperial Presidency which now obtains. There should be no way in which one man can levy tariffs the way Trump has done. The Congress made a huge error in delegating such power to the President, especially without sunset clause.
More important, Professor Yoo, Our nation should have a foreign policy, subject to checks and balances in the Congress.
Trump should not only be impeached and convicted and removed from office, he should be indicted, tried and sent to prison for his various criminal acts, including a large number of counts of obstructing justice.
It may also turn out that his crimes include treason, making him eligible for the death penalty. I hope for our country that is not the case, but Trump has shown himself to be a very selfish, corrupt and evil person.
Unlike an absolute monarch, the president is not the state.
1676
@Gene S
You are wrong. The presidency does not have too much power. The President(s) have been breaking the law at no cost. Congress has the authority for oversight. Trump ignores all the laws and orders his followers to do the same. This is not too much authority, it is going well beyond his authority which is why he should be impeached.
60
Yoo had a different opinion when it was Clinton:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB900716236882584500
hmmm, I wonder what the difference could be?
200
@Gene S
We don't need a death penalty. We can reduce the sentence. Leaving office now might be a reasonable plea deal.
But I would like to see Trump explain to a jury how asking a hostile intelligence agency to hack our elections on TV is not treason. In fact if anyone could explain how attacking our defenders while praising our attackers is not treason, I would be obliged.
106
John Yoo arguing for presidential dictatorship. What a surprise!
21
Trump already did.
3
Finally, a sensible column. From day 1 the demos had nothing on their mind but impeachment of the president. And here we go again the failing demos and their endless futile pursuit to impeach the president. Rest assure, they will have at least 5 more years to pursue their pathetic circus of impeachment. It is more comical than pathetic. AOC the squad and the bunch of demo losers working so hard to ensure Trump’s re-election 2020
5
Have you heard of the oath to defend the United States Constitution? Are you acquainted with the "rule of law?" Do you understand Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5? Very sad.
10
We love you Trump. You are the true American patriot.
3
Dr. Yoo, let’s first get a POTUS who isn’t corrupt to the core and has read and understands the Constitution, then get back to us.
10
Pelosi has hardly rushing into this!
8
What has destroyed the credibility of the United States in the world community is a President who demonstrates his willful ignorance of world affairs every day, backed by a party that is wiling to watch the country go down the tubes as it covers up his myriad crime sprees.
17
Virtually the last person who should lecture us on anything is Mr. Yoo. He is the perfect example of the modern Republican traitor. My ancestors wrote the Constitution and fought for it: they didn't do this so you could make a Republican King.
33
If we don’t we will soon have a dictator
We stand together or...
2
Oh for gods sake. This impeachment protects the nation and the presidency.
15
Professor Yoo, this president has to go.
9
With all due respects to the author of this "Opinion" piece.
I do hope you are only playing "devil's advocate" to get a response, or pulse, of the readers.
9
Give me a break! Clinton was impeached for lying about having an affair with a consenting adult. Most married people lie about having affairs. Of course it hurts the spouse and that's why people lie.
Trump lies about everything. He's so pathetic that he lied about a hurricane hitting Alabama and used a silly Sharpie drawing in an attempt to prove it. If Trump's mouth is open, he's lying
Impeachment won't hurt the presidency. Donald Trump is hurting the presidency.
63
Utterly unpersuasive.
32
I am hoping that these impeachment proceedings, as tardy as they are, will incorporate everything illicit, dishonest, vulgar, stupid, self-serving, conniving, deceptive and moronic promulgated by this sad and ugly visage of a man...with all the thousands of lies heaped on top for extra visual depiction of the carnage. The phone call to the the Ukrainian president is just the latest insult to democracy, but it alone is insufficient fodder for impeachment when there is so many other exhibits to be marked. It may be too little and too late, but finally Congress has mustered some fortitude, and now they need to go after this atrocity like the future of our country depends on it--because it does.
16
Baloney. We have a criminal in the White House. Get him out. He needs to spend the rest of his life in prison. And we need to get on with the good business of the nation.
26
He's not conducting foreign policy. He's committing treason.
35
What hurts the presidency is a self-dealing criminal in the Oval Office, and a caucus that puts said criminal's political party ahead of America and the Constitution. The author knows this.
But then why should we expect integrity or honesty from someone who endorsed torture and warrantless wiretaps. during the GW Bush administration. Come on NYT - why were these gems not mentioned in your bio of Yoo at the end of this piece. Why no mention of the Bybee memo? This part of Yoo's background speaks directly to his credibility. Which, to the informed, is less than zero.
44
Beware of NOT impeaching the President. It could hurt our Congress!!!
217
Is this the same John Yoo who in April wrote a WaPo editorial suggesting impeachment should happen?
Well how about that.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/john-yoo-its-now-impeachment-or-bust-as-it-should-be/2019/04/19/e1919860-6214-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html
18
John Yoo has persistently sought to justify appalling behavior on constitutional grounds. This time he has no constitutional basis for his claim. Shame on him (yet again, given his justifications for torture)!!!
75
This is nonsense. The president needs to be accountable.
All phone calls should be RECORDED and kept on record forever.
Every visitor must be logged in, and noted and kept on record forever.
Medical records and tax returns must be submitted, as well as a psychological evaluation.
Why demand less of the president than of an airline pilot on a feeder route? It's crazy.
The tide is turning against the likes of Trump and Boris Johnson. People are SICK and TIRED of being rolled by these charlatans and their enablers.
This situation has been going on for years, already, and everyone is worn out.
ENOUGH.
61
Balderdash. Impeachment of Trump will elevate the presidency and help to begin restoring America's reputation as a world leader. Founders this and that ... blah, blah, blah
37
this is the same John Yoo who authored memos misusing the law to allow and justify torture by the Bush Administration. How does he sleep at night?
79
Huh? Are you kidding me? Get Trump and Pence out of here if it applies. We have enough self respecting elected officials who can run the country and foreign relations far better than this joke of a president.
23
Who on earth cares what John Yoo thinks. Let him spend his time explaining his support for torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
66
John Yoo has tainted anything he touches with his writing legal opinions legitimizing torture. What really weakens America, Mr. Yoo?
51
Oh please.
This President has done so much to destroy our reputation and our alliances.
He has no interest in the role of government except as it answers the question, “what about my needs?”
He is a liar and a conman.
So spare me the “damage it will do to institutions.”
Of course, this comes from the guy who justified torture during the Bush administration.
So again, I say give it up Mr Woo.
32
Why does any news outlet give a voice to the man who gave the OK for the US to torture? Who harmed US interests and is a perpetual stain on this country. Not interested in your opinion Yoo. Go away.
46
Trump himself is hurting the presidency. He can only spit in our faces so many times before we say,' Enough.' Saying 'enough' is a good thing, not a bad thing. It's a much-needed corrective to a presidency that's gone off the rails.
21
This from the guy who wrote the handbook on torture for the Bush administration. Shameful.
31
Coming from John Yoo, this is no surprise. He was in the Justice Dept. under Bush II, and, with Dick Cheney and David Addington, supported waterboarding. He stated that children can be tortured if necessary. Regarding this opinion piece, consider the source.
30
John Yoo is the guy who wrote the memo justifying waterboarding as NOT constituting torture. Clearly, that position, written to support the political interests of the more extreme elements of the George W. Bush administration, has been shown to be utter nonsense. Yoo's memo was in fact a tortured argument in support of a position well outside the mainstream of the law.
Why is the New York Times giving John Yoo an opportunity to publish additional nonsense?
Could it be that Yoo is auditioning for the position of Attorney General in the Trump administration in case William Barr is also impeached for lying under oath to Congress?
28
Professor Yoo seems to ignore the fact that this President could care less about foreign policy and national security. He can't use his office to cloak his immoral and corrupt methods of smearing his political opponents. There's plenty in the Federalist Papers to spell out that We the People have the means to expel an individual as corrupt as this President.
12
Few people in American history have done more to hurt the presidency than you did, Mr. Yoo, when you delivered that ridiculous justification for torture to the Bush White House. You are the last person (other than those self-dealing crooks in the current administration) that anyone in American should listen to on this subject.
41
This from a man that sought to validate torture in the Bush administration, and further defends on Constitutional grounds a man that has flaunted the Constitution almost since the moment he took office. You talk the tall real well Mr. Yoo, but i am doubtful you will ever walk the walk.
15
Really, more striking examples of chutzpah have rarely appeared in these pages.
18
Leftist democrats don't care about the integrity of the presidency. They would have exercised a bit of restraint long ago if they were. The liberals are out of control and have been radicalized to irrationality. Their chosen candidate to be president was quite corrupt and should have been fired while she was Secretary of State. This is an example of a cadre of radicals that are trying to seize power by any means, aided by a sympathetic and corrupt media.
7
The subtitle is: "We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation"
My question is: How is a pressure campaign waged, in part, by the president's personal attorney a matter of foreign policy, and how does this protect our nation? What, exactly, was the goal? If the leadership of the Ukraine was engaged in undermining our security, then by all means, let's get to the bottom of it. I'll wait.
112
A president basically strong-arming a foreign leader into providing oppo research on a potential rival by threatening to withhold U.S. aid — if that is not clear abuse of the office and its power, I don’t know what is.
Impeachment, in its simplest construct, is a check on that power. If anybody has needed that rein — as well as the reminder that he is not above the state nor its rule of law — it is Donald J. Trump.
(And I’m pretty sure the authors of the Federalist Papers would agree with me here.)
106
Professor Yoo is afraid that impeachment is dangerous because it would limit the President's ability to conduct military affairs. In the same article, he recommends cutting military funding as a punitive measure. This does not compute.
69
"But suppose the worst suspicions about Mr. Trump come true. Suppose he offered $400 million in aid to Mr. Zelensky for damaging information about Mr. Biden . . . A special congressional committee could review classified information in secret and bring United States and foreign officials to testify under oath."
In what world would this happen if there had not been a whistle blower who was aware of Trump's
communication with the Ukraine President Zelesky and had the courage to report it to an authority who found his concern credible. I do not understand who's behavior you are more upset with, the whistle blower for not blindly supporting the President or for Congress having the awareness of Trump's impeachable offense and beginning impeachment proceedings. As far as this being a limitation on the power of the Presidency, I do believe as many have said this is a different kind of president and I do not imagine that other president's will need the boundaries that Trump certainly requires.
55
Professor Yoo, let me take up your point.
You suggest that this can be handed by Congress behind the scenes. Yet, was it not only the threat of impeachment that brought any promise of cooperation from the Trump Administration on this matter?
Has not the Trump Administration refused to cooperate in any number of legitimate Congressional inquiries?
Is Trump not asserting executive privileged in countless Congressional investigations, thus making all pretense of this President's belief in the separation of powers null and void?
Professor Yoo, with all due respect, I consider myself a keen student of American history; and I have never heard the argument made by any historian of quality that a majority of Framers wanted an imperial President. Hamilton may have wanted it - but he was not taken seriously at the Convention. The argument that I've consistently heard from historians is that they wanted a weak President, and if they hadn't known that George Washington, the indispensable man of the American Revolution, and a man with more character in his littlest finger than Donald Trump has in his entire body, was to be our first President, they would made the position much weaker.
Donald Trump is doing America a great service by demonstrating that, thank to legal experts like yourself, our Presidents now have too much power.
We need to return to the wisdom of the Framers, who put their primary trust in the "we" and not the "me".
144
Waiting for an election is no longer defensible. If a president can corruptly use the apparatus of the state to give himself an advantage in his reelection campaign then it is foolhardy to try to remove him that way, to say nothing of the damage to our nation he can exact in the meantime.
66
Mr. Yoo, Trump is damaging the presidency, and is doing so everyday, as he is with the security of the United States. But, I believe you already know that. So, rather than protect the Republican Party, let us put country first.
85
Professor Yoo conflates regulation with supervision. Regulation is proactive, intended to discourage and prevent deleterious practices: adults are licensed before they can drive, drugs are tested before they can be sold, and areas are zoned before they are developed. The process is almost uniformly notorious for its inefficiency. US foreign policy cannot operate under so onerous a burden; the "decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch" that Hamilton cited -- and which most Americans will agree are essential to the conduct of foreign policy -- would be crippled by regulation.
What Democrats seek is not regulation, however: it is oversight. They do not wish to vet every word the president says to foreign leaders. They do not seek to listen in on presidential phone calls. Democrats are only acting on reports of egregiously corrupt behavior, which they received through other pre-existing and legal means. They aim not to interpose themselves between the president and foreign officials, merely to take action when evidence of corruption presents itself. This is entirely in line with Congress's constitutional mandates: the president commands the armed forces, but only Congress can declare war. The president directs and leads negotiations with other states, but the power to ratify treaties is the exclusive privilege of Congress. It follows, then, that while Congress may not regulate foreign policy, it is surely in their power to oversee it.
54
Question for the author, a leader of at least two right-wing policy pushers (worthy causes for a person of his political bend):
If a President as radically left as Trump is radically right, popular election loser, used the office for personal gain and to increase the power of the far-left of the Democratic party, and self, change the ideology of the normally fairly-centered federal bench - appointed staff and judges who promised idealogical but also personal loyalty...
And ignored the overall good of the nation, ignoring law, advice of high-ranking civil servants who devote their lives the freedoms you hold most important ...
Would you make the same argument?
Or is this a matter of fashioning an argument, very persuasive on its surface, but not when dissected, to defend the particular ideologies you hold dear?
Of the three Presidential impeachments - of A. Johnson, Nixon and Clinton, only the Nixon impeachment actually concerned real crimes.
The first was over ideology - Johnson’s effort to quickly undo the outcome of the Civil War - the Democrat who followed Lincoln, when Democrats stood for State’s Rights and slavery; the GOP, for their martyr’s strong Federalism and limited civil rights.
The third was a joke, reduced to embarrassing a man for tacky behavior.
Nixon resigned rather than face the inevitable.
Johnson and Clinton were vindicated; Clinton re-elected.
The Presidency was not harmed.
35
"We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation."
No one has done more long-term harm to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation than Trump.
71
Donald Trump has already done untold damage to the presidency and to our country and simply must be stopped from doing more. He must be held accountable for his actions regardless of the political cost.
39
Show me the law or policy that says that the president is “not a member of the intelligence community.” Sorry, but if the president has authority and oversight over the intelligence community, he is, ipso facto, “a member of the intelligence community,” just as his role of commander-in-chief makes him a member of the military community, whether or not he’s a member of any branch of the military. And no amount of tortured legal sophistry on the part of John Yoo or anyone else can change that.
32
Like his torture memo, as legal analysis this is an embarrassment.
For one thing, he cites the Federalist Papers for plenary presidential authority in international affairs. I was not aware that we had codified them. But even if we had, the provisions he cites are merely the opinions of A. Hamilton expressly directed at the conduct of war, which (I hope) is not our sole means of international relations.
Yoo also says that the sole duty of executive branch officials to is aid him in his execution of constitutional duties. What of his unconstitutional acts? Are they required to aid his execution of those as well? Or cover them up?
The fact that the president may be the sole organ of international relations does not give the president power to do whatever he wants. He may be the face of America, but he is also our employee. He may conduct himself as our representative only in accordance with our Constitution and laws.
He may not declare war. Nor may he conspire with foreign powers to influence our elections.
Having gone through his "analysis," Yoo then provides a revisionist history of the fall of the USSR and posits a fantasy as to how Congress might withhold funding to compel information. How much national security is Yoo willing to compromise to get to the truth?
Our president is an executive, not an autocrat. Neither he nor Yoo seem to understand that.
89
Re: White House Seeks Deal for Whistle-Blower to Speak to Congress
"Officials are negotiating to allow the person who filed the complaint against President Trump to share at least some of the details with investigators on Capitol Hill."
No more stonewalling!
Job number one of the impeachment inquiry should be gaining access of the full, declassified and unredacted whistleblower complaint.
No negotiations beyond that are required.
15
The title has the issue backwards. Impeachment doesn’t harm the office, the incumbent does.
47
" Congress’s traditional oversight powers will force the intelligence agencies and the White House to provide the facts behind the Trump-Zelensky call and any delay in Ukrainian aid."
Where has Yoo been all this time.? This is precisely what the White House has refused to do. It is exactly why Trump needs to be impeached. He is challenging the constitutional process. If anyone is hurting the presidency, it is Trump himself. Like honor, only the person itself can besmirch his honor and Trump is doing that to the presidency. And speaking of hurting the presidency, Yoo himself has contributed to t it when he submitted a legal opinion declaring unspeakable tortures legal.
21
"...rushing into an impeachment ..."
by any measure the Democratic Party's leadership in the House of Representatives is definitively NOT rushing into impeachment.
The Democratic Party's leadership in the House of Representatives has been restrained to a fault.
17
The logic exhibited by Yoo is beyond circular, Perhaps a third dimensional, spherical structure is more appropriate. His false history of what led to the Vietnam debacle undercuts his entire premise. (The war was escalated by the Exec branch alone, using a congressional resolution as fig leaf--much like the AUMF Bush wrangled through congress to get us into Iraq).
23
"The Constitution trusts the American people, acting through the ballot box, to render judgment on President Trump. Democrats should trust the framers’ faith in the American people, too."
Yes. However - when facts are hidden?
7
Mr. Yoo says the Democrats are "rushing" into impeachment - seriously? Pelosi was finally dragged in, with more than 180 members of her caucus saying it had to be done.
Then, he says Congressional oversight committees could investigate without impeachment, by requiring the Trump White House to "provide the facts."
What planet does he live on? Trump has made it clear there will be no cooperation in any way, of any kind, for any purpose - before this scandal. And he's got Attorney General Barr to back him up, forcing everything to the courts. THAT'S why he might win re-election: he's had years to convince Americans that any push-back against him is deep state and "angry Dems" and "fake news."
When the law says "tax returns shall be provided upon request" and it takes months for the request to be made, so that every t and i is ready, - and Trump's IRS still says "no" -
When Barr spins the Mueller report for 4 days and then releases a redacted version and takes months to finally say "no" to providing the background materials -
I could go on, but it's crystal clear that any idea that the Trump administration will act like a responsible branch of government without being forced through impeachment proceedings to behave - if it even will then - is silly.
Trump is not a "normal" politician. He has already hurt the presidency and the country.
29
Mr. Yoo (champion of the use of torture in the name of the United States of America, you may remember) should explain to us how the Congress, other than by doing what it must to rein in the President's lawless impulses, self-dealing, and divisiveness, can act as a co-equal to a minority President who has little regard for the rule of law and for the Constitution. President Gaslighter is not a normal president, let alone a normal man, Mr. Yoo. Saving the Nation from such a miscreant requires iron resolve and strong action by an oppositional Congress and impenetrable fences around him.
38
Prof. Yoo, Out of Curiosity what would it take to convince you that Congress tried but failed to get the cited material? I mean by your logic Congress should imperial the national security by withholding funding in order to compel what is entitled to under statue.
Based on past behavior there is no reason to believe this President would or will ever act in a manner that does not maximize the power of the Office Of President. By electing to withhold the whistle blower complaint his minions, presumably at his direction, basically gave Congress no choice but to at least threaten Impeachment. Executive priviledge, national security, or any other reason does not excuse ignoring a 'shall' provide demand in oversight legislation. Trump could have prevented this, and even done what is alleged, and it would have been disappointing, but probably legal had he just furnished the whistle blower complaint.
7
This is the same highly partisan Republican John Yoo who drafted and advised George W Bush that laws prohibiting torture are unconstitutional in the context of war because they limit a president’s authority. Sorry John, you have consistently rejected core principles imbedded in our constitution and American values central to our democracy, you have zero credibility.
49
Less worried about the presidential powers. More worried about the survival of our democracy.
20
This article recaps Yoo's long-time commitment to ceding all foreign policy (and war-making) powers to the Executive. God help us!
23
This is a nonsense story: leaving Trump in power is destroying the Office of the President inexorably. It is already a world laughing-stock. Any future governent, Democrat or Republican will feel entitled to the same actions as Trump. American democracy and system of government is dead,
10
Where has Mr Yoo been ... seriously ? The presidency has already been damaged by Trump and is now in a constitutional crisis. Either, you’re a patriot or you’re not and it’s more than time to proceed with impeachment of Trump !
10
Nonsense, Professor Yoo. Our country has constitutional guidelines against creeping authoritarianism, abuse of power, corruption, and--in the case of conniving with foreign powers to undermine our democracy--what is a prima facie case of treason.
13
Lots of things hurt the Presidency. Authorizing torture hurt the Presidency and the entire Executive Branch.
23
Yoo you are wrong, the wheels are off the bus and no one is around with the guts to correct him. Trump has fired them all or they have left, and I believe he no longer wants the job, he is over his head and knows it, and Putin and China are knocking his block off.
11
We need an international symbol for a raspberry we can use as comments for pieces like these.
Sir, I suggest you spend a little time contemplating the lasting damage to the presidency this president has already committed.
14
So speaks a supporter of the unitary executive.
16
There is enough malfeasance on Trump out there already to impeach him without the whistleblower. The Ukraine incident is just icing on the cake.
8
John Yoo, the "president" has already hurt the Presidency and the Constitution as well. I'm not surprised you haven't noticed.
14
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment...."
It's a bit late to be talking about rushing.
14
“The Constitution trusts the American people, acting through the ballot box, to render judgment on President Trump. Democrats should trust the framers’ faith in the American people, too.”
The American people voted against Trump by a 3 million vote margin. It now seems they had good reason.
28
How sad it is that John Yoo chooses to support the presidency instead of democracy! Minority President Trump has done so many things that truly harm our country and the presidency. His behavior convincingly supports America's need for checks and balances to limit presidential over-reach and self-aggrandizement, and re-balance governmental power. Without effectively administered limits of impeachment and removal from office, we will always be at the mercy of run-away despots like Mr. Trump. He proves that our presidents must remain aware that they are in office to serve Americans, not vice versa.
13
And maybe, Mr Yoo, if the Obama administration had not opposed an inquiry into the dark arts of VP Cheney and others in the administration you served, we would not have a current president who believes he is above the law. Foreign policy does not extend to trying to browbeat a foreign government into helping one’s re-election campaign.
16
Sorry, Prof. Yoo. After nearly three years of the Donald Trump regime, I’m more concerned about the dame the Presidency can do to the nation. Presidents are expendable. The 330 million citizens of the country are not.
14
During the Bush/Cheney administration, John Yoo wrote legal opinions which tried to justify the use of waterboarding and other torture by our government. It's not surprising that someone like him would like an unfettered President. His views about the Constitution and proper roles of the branches of government should be considered in this light.
36
John Yoo is the White House Counsel that said Bush could order torture even though torture is illegal in the U.S.A., because the president can do what ever he wants.
The Right has invented a "unitary executive" out of thin air, that has no constraints on its power.
Obama should have demanded that those responsible for torture against U.S. law were arrested and tried for those crimes.
Now we have a president that is clearly attacking all of the Constitution as often as possible, and the NY Times prints this Right-Wing excuse for making the president back into a king.
The only thing in the way of the president's ability to conduct foreign policy is that Trump thinks its Trump's foreign policy not Our Nation's foreign policy. Trump thinks the presidency is about him. That makes every official decision by him an act of official corruption, an abuse of power.
Yes, any one Trump's attacks on the Constitution can be explained away, if it was an isolated incident. But Trump's attacks on the Constitution are constant. Trump has a PATTERN of attacking ALL Constitutional principles. He is attacking every pillar of Our Republic, to bring it down.
Trump is a walking High Crime because his entire mission is to destroy checks on presidential power.
So of course, John Yoo rushes in, because that is his mission also.
John Yoo has weakened the Constitution and there are thousands of other Americans that who have more right to discuss Trump's High Crimes on the NY Times Opinion Pages.
34
Yoo’s legal logic is as tortured as his Bush memos. His origins of executive privilege contorts an originalist interpretation of the Constitution Which is a fatally flawed document that allowed white landowners to enslave people they considered 3/5 a person. Washington had 120 slaves. Fairyland time is over. Trump has laid bare the myth of the American experiment. It always was about who controls power. If we are to redeem a semblance of a republic Trump must be held accountable or what’s left of our shredded legal system will be remembered as the start of the second American Civil War.
16
The headline "Beware of Impeaching Trump. It Could Hurt the Presidency. / We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation." reads an awful lot like "Nice nation you have here. Be a shame if anything happened to it."
11
Mr Yoo has his priorities skewed. He's worried about future Presidents ability to conduct foreign policy while Trump with the GOP's acquiescence is on a trajectory to destroy American democracy outright.
7
John Yoo's vision of the presidency would make him a temporary dictator, and how long before he was just simply a dictator?
Read Patterns of Democracy by political scientist Arend Lijphart. Prof. Lijphart surveys over thirty democracies around the world and finds that parliamentary democracies in which the Executive is subordinate to the Legislature (as opposed to Presidential democracies where the inverse holds) are more responsive to the people. That's not surprising.
4
The author actually has the audacity to say this, "A president...who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing, must have confidence in the confidentiality of his communications or he will be unable to perform his constitutional duties...." And the further audacity to suppose his readers to swallow such pure nonsense. Yoo has said equally empty-headed things in past administrations but I honestly believe this tops it all.
It doesn't take a genius to see through such transparent wisps of verbal weeds. Obviously such a President might be deterred from wrongdoing (although I wouldn't count on it). He or she certainly won't be deterred from any legitimate duties. Who knows, maybe the time freed up from corrupt activities might be used to consider legal activities. Yoo thinks the opposite. Well, it takes all kinds.
10
Professor Yoo writes a first-class article, carefully reasoned and cited, about the office of the presidency, However, where he would like to stay in the abstract about a threat to the legitimate powers of an effective Executive branch, to grant his point is to ignore the disastrous present administration his article is intended to support. How do I know this is true? By the simple fact that he ignores any mention of the greed, graft, abuse of power, lying, treason- in fact a list that is so long, it's almost pointless to list all of even the most serious transgressions. This is a fatal mistake, but understandable, given that the good Professor probably knows the sage advice Thumper's Mom gave to her son, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."
I can well worry about threats to the office another time. I'm rather more worried about the elephant in the room.
4
Too much power has accrued to the presidency over the past two centuries. No wonder we keep losing wars when they are started recklessly and without input from the American people. Think of it the same way as a minute man's musket having turned into a AR-15. Both the office and the weapon should be restrained.
5
John, Yoo? The same John Yoo who helped Bush break international law during the various military ventures, torture sessions, and violations of US civil rights? That John Yoo?
Mr Yoo, you rightly state that impeachment is a last resort of holding the President to account. You make this statement after suggesting Congress use its oversight and budget powers to compel Trump and his band of criminal accessories to testify. Yes, because that has worked so well thus far. Congress has made every effort to exercise its oversight only to have Trump thumb his nose at them.
We are at the last resort. Congress must take this drastic measure; otherwise, we will risk the Constitution for generations to come. Trump is all but daring Congress to undertake impeachment proceedings. He is like an addict getting ever closer to the proverbial gutter until someone intervenes. While I am concerned that impeachment proceedings may backfire, Trump will continue to push the limits of the law as long as he knows Congress will do nothing to control him.
By the way, all of this may have been avoided if Trump had followed the law by allowing the whistleblower complaint to go forward to Congress.
What more do the likes of you need?
15
The truth is Mr. Yoo, that if there were more oversight and more listening in, you might not have been able to sue your pro-torture memos for President Bush.
The second truth is that the time of the imperial president needs to come to an end, because of both obvious corruption (Trump) and less obvious but equally dangerous instances of purchased influence (as in Obama’s education policies that were ducted by his rich supporters).
There is no reason to justify presidential secrecy when there have been too many recent examples of just those secrets ending up harming our citizens and our nation. Your argument is for a world that has imploded. Ex regnum ad populii!
5
"We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation. "
Surely you must avoid strengthening the president's ability to conduct foreign policy to profit his businesses, weaken and threaten your nation.
4
"We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation," states the kicker underneath the headline.
What a laugh! Trump has done a lot of harm, all by himself.
Is Professor Yoo having us on?
6
Far too much power has ben ceded to the executive branch - as Trump has demonstrated.
3
According to Professor Yoo, no matter what, a president's communications with foreign leaders must be confidential. Ergo, if a president is soliciting a bribe or committing treason in his conversations, those conversations must be confidential and Congress has no oversight role. I wonder if Professor Yoo would say the same thing if the accused was a Democrat.
7
WE aren't doing the damage. HE is.
9
Mr. Yoo really has a forest and trees problem. Is thee a possible problem with Congress treading on presidential foreign policy turf? Yes. Mr. Trump who lies daily to Mr. Yoo and the rest of us presents a danger to the presidency, foreign relations, the rule of law and our democracy. I'll take my chances with congress for now.
I am curious why the New York Times gives space to one who believes that torture should be in our playbook.
8
Nothing can hurt the presidency more than leaving Trump in place.
6
Oh, thank you, now I see clearly that Trump should be able to whatever he wants. Including destroying the USA.
9
Yoo complained in 1998 that "Clinton is effectively the first President to formally assert a complete freedom from the criminal justice system solely because he is President."
3
A president (like all other Americans) should not be incapable of being fired.
Currently, impeachment is the only process that we have when a president is so bad that he or she is completely unfit for office. Every day of bad leadership is a day that threatens the integrity of the nation. We can't sit idle while the president is incompetent.
Yes, we should have more tools besides impeachment. We should have a recall election or a non-partisan governance board or a federal HR department or something for when a president is hopelessly incompetent, but we don't and we need to dismiss this president NOW.
2
Mr. Yoo's thoughts read like another thinly veiled argument forgiving ongoing corruption and incompetence. It is a shame there is no equivalence between what many of his confreres demand from others and what they settle for from their own.
3
We should have impeached and imprisoned every Republican president from Nixon until this one. Each administration was more brazen and lawless and FINALLY, it's time for that naked power grab to stop.
So stop it on harming the presidency. Maybe it needs to be harmed so we get over the notion that the President is above oversight and the law.
6
Unlike all other developed nations, the USA has one person act as head of state, head of government and commander-in-chief of the military. The only other nations that place this much power in the hands of one individual are either dictatorships or less developed, poorer nations. It is time for Congress to seriously consider limiting the powers of the Presidency lest, God forbid, a madman were to become president. Imagine if all that power were ever handed to, let's say, a populist reality-show host with no prior experience in politics who sexually assaults women, threatens to jail his opponents and appoints a shoe designer as his senior advisor, who also happens to be his daughter. You may laugh, but it could happen.
7
Reads like a legal brief for a client with bad facts and little legal support.
3
Just because you believe the President should conduct foreign affairs on behalf of the US doesn't mean when a President breaks the law while conducting foreign affairs he should not be brought up on charges. To ignore unlawful behavior is tantamount to condoning it. What, in the name of future Presidents being able to conduct foreign affairs?
Ridiculous!
This country was founded on the rule of law and that must always be preserved. In fact we have a President who takes pleasure in bending and breaking the rules and the rule of law. He should have already been brought up on charges but for political reasons (not agreed upon by all) has not been.
I would also argue that not only was the conversation and apparent "quid pro quo" to the President of Ukraine illegal BUT the White House's refusal to forward a "Whistleblower's Complaint" to Congress was completely illegal.
Two illegal acts from just one conversation. Trump is a walking law breaker. He doesn't care about the rule of law or the truth.
No other President in recent times has had the number of staff/cabinet members under indictment. Reagan had a good amount; Trump breaks the record.
One last question: will the US Government insist on getting back all the money Trump forced his own government to pay him by making them stay at his resorts/hotels around the world? What about foreign governments staying at the Trump DC property?
Trump knows only one thing, how to enrich himself at the expense of others.
4
Are you serious? This person who is in the Presidential seat is abusing power and conducting secret agreements with foreign powers. How much more damage could be done to the Presidency. Please reevaluate your thinking.
5
Trump has nearly destroyed the position, not to mention the damage he has done to our nation and the world at large. Sadly, because he's so destructive, this is the state of things.
3
I recall your single-minded protection of presidential executive power in the past, when you served GW. Your legalistic expertise no doubt vastly exceeds mine. Yet it is incomprehensible to anyone who wants to preserve democracy why this president, who cares only about himself and made a mockery of the position conferred on him, would need protection. Common sense puts your arguments to shame. Similarly, the urgency of removing him from office right now dwarves your dark prophecies.
6
John Woo authored the OLC opinion that a POTUS can't be indicted, while he was in the Bush Admin. He is a strong believer in unitary powers for the POTUS - he believes the President can do anything he wants under Article II. He also tried to legitimize waterboarding. Not necessarily the type of opinion we should be taking seriously, considering that he is one of Barr's staunchest supporters.
Readers, beware.
7
We certainly need to focus on too much control rather than too little since the president can become a fascist leader pretty darn quickly as we have seen.
Doesn't Fascism take root when the economic classes with practically nothing or little, begin to hold on to less and less?
Things are getting tougher and uglier every day for many.
The disgruntled are the people that support fascist leaders. I describe fascist behavior in modern language: People that want to blow-up things (society, class, law, morals...)
I suppose what we are actually seeing is a revolution leading to fascism. Horrifying times if history is a model.
Does this seem familiar?
Fascism is a form of far right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
Description from wikipedia.
2
It is exactly the other way around NOT impeaching Trump would hurt the presidency and the US.
Allowing president to use foreigner policy as a tool of dealing with political rivals would cause long-term harm turning foreign policy as a tool for reelection rather than protecting our nation.
John Yoo is talking up treason. If a political enemy did something illegal go after them using US Department of Justice and the FBI. Not corrupt foreign governments. If Trump did what he admitted he did, he belongs in prison for treason.
2
John Yoo wishes to protect our system of government by protecting the wrecking ball in chief to the presidency. Not if you waterboard me, John, not even then would I allow another unchallenged assault on our TRIPARTITE government.
With his legal opinion's support of torture, Yoo's promotion of unequal power among the three parts had already eradicated most of the U.S.'s moral authority in the world; now he seeks to eradicate U.S. citizen's protections from a systematic and inspired effort to dismantle domestic governance as well.
Yoo must be perfect for a spot on Bill Barr's team of enablers in bad faith. Checks and balances are for Democrats only, apparently.
28
Sorry this conman trump has crossed the line just like Nixon and Clinton before him - the process in fact strengthens our democracy.
How long can we stand by and watch the corrupt trump rape and pillage the White House?
6
Rubbish.
Mr Trump is off the continuum and into the dark,
for anything resembling trustworthy stewardship.
Let Mr Pence step up until January 2021.
7
In what universe are you living? The presidency was damaged, well nigh destroyed, on November 8 2016. There is no last resort. This is it. Carpe Diem.
8
You let this corrupt GOP Trump get away with this if there are more of them in the future they will be worse in corruption. Trump made a comment during the campaign i can shoot someone and still be elected President. That is just plain sick. Lock him up .
7
Mr. Yoo States
"Beware of Impeaching Trump. It Could Hurt the Presidency. "
Himm If History is a teacher, Mr. Yoo was on the wrong side last time while carrying water to another GOP president.
This Kavanaugh style, ancient Nixonian doctrine of Presidential might and executive privilege will and should die with Trump presidency.
King , empire, Supreme Leader , Ayatollah style presidential ambitions has no place in American democracy ANYMORE.
Trump exhausted that.
Future Presidents (democrats or Republicans) must be reigned and checked by Congress what ever the cost is and should bring under order of law.
Mr. Yoo please go back your University no body want to hear your archaic presidential executive privilege ideology anymore.
6
I feel that the county should use the phrase that he is so commonly attached with "YOUR FIRED"!!!!!!!
3
Trump: "Hold my beer!"
2
This sounds like a guide to creating a monarchy. Do you recommend we prorogue Congress?
10
So don’t impeach the President. What about waterboarding? That’s ok surely?
12
This is the last resort. Get it.
4
Dude, the house is on fire!
3
The Presidency has already been hurt by Donald Trump, a mentally unhinged crackpot who places blame on everyone else but himself and his lack of ability to be a true and honest leader. He has cast the USA as a corrupt and criminal enterprise that doesn't adhere to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or any national or international laws or institutions, and it is long past the due date to formally remove him from the position. He is an embarrassment to the entire county.
7
Impeachment could hurt the Presidency?
Why didn’t Republicans think of that argument when they impeached Bill Clinton for lying about who he was having sex with?
13
Time’s up.
5
I can imagine one of the framers of the Constitution suggesting the possibility that the country would elect, by minority, someone such as what now sits in the White House, discussing Article II, and hearing a choral, interrobanged, “Are you nuts?!” We’ll never know if that happened, because he was probably summarily declared too insane to be included in any further proceedings, and was stricken from the record.
2
Long term damage!!! What do you think Trump has done to the presidency? Are you serious? I think we can spare the presidency and foreign policy by just straight up arresting him for treason and tell Barr and the DoJ to stick that "indictment memo" in their ear.
The boat for impeachment has sailed
9
typo: rushing into an impeachment *that* may
John Yoo, Trump himself has hurt the Presidential office. No one to blame but himself and his fellow crooks. The only way to clean the stench in the White House is to remove the rot.
4
Lets concern ourselves with the present situation. Our president is a fascist who has already destroyed the presidency. To preserve our Democracy, Trump needs to be held accountable. If he isn't, this great experiment in Democracy that was so precious to our founding fathers and Lincoln could be on its last leg.
5
Too late!
1
Nonsense. From the author of the GW Bush Waterboarding documents, no less. I guess you think W is now a saint, compared to the Apprentice in the White House.
Impeachment has been justified since day 1 of this presidency, when DT cheated and faked his way through the election thanks to Putin and _convicted_ _criminals_ like Manafort, Flynn, etc.
This list: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/opinion/trump-ukraine-whistle-blower.html
has at least a dozen other impeachable charges in it. and let's not forget the obstruction of justice charges in the Mueller report.
7
" Every turn this administration demonstrates—demonstrates disdain and disregard for the law and for the constitution. They have lied under oath. They refuse to account for their action(s) and appear before the legislative body who have the constitutional right to inquire about their activities. The people have a right to inquire. They have a right to know. The people have a right to know whether they can put their faith and trust in the outcome of our election. They have a right to know whether the cornerstone of our democracy was undermined by people sitting in the White House today. They have a right to know whether a foreign power were asked to intervene in the 2020 election. They have a right to know whether the president is using his office to line his pockets...." Rep. John Lewis
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/john-lewis-says-moved-spirit-171400141.html
1
The title of this Op-Ed is possibly the most mind-blind title I have experienced. "It could hurt the presidency"???
Has Mr. Woo lifted his head out of his laptop long enough to notice what this president is doing to the presidency?
We'll patch the presidency back together as best we can over time once we rid it of this rancid man and his minions.
6
This president is hurting the country. If you can't see that I feel sorry for you.
6
It's time for a new constitution anyways. The old one from colonial times has failed.
... because impeaching a president for lying about an affair didn't?
6
Not persuasive John.
5
Your lead is pure nonsense. Trump is in the process of destroying the Presidency.
Give us a break, Mr. Yoo.
11
So, waterboarding and torture: good.
Holding the president accountable for high crimes: bad.
Got it.
Thank you for your insight, Dr. Yoo
23
"Could hurt the presidency?" Thanks for the laugh.
11
Do you suggest that we shorten the process by waterboarding Trump?
14
Hilarious! "We should beware that RUSHING into an impeachment may do long-term harm..." John Yoo should write for The Onion.
15
I don’t care about the transcript. I want the whistleblower’s report.
Anyone with half a brain and a smidgen of conscience would see that it is way past time for impeachment proceedings against trumpie. House Democrats are finally doing their sworn duty.
5
Take seriously the past 18 years of executive abuses when impeaching Trump.
Hurt the Presidency? Please. Spare long suffering Times' readers who've followed the Trump Criminal Family from its New York origins to the White House and its systematic disregard for the law. Just don't forget that in the past these well-to-do, highly educated, usurpers of democracy have
appeared in Rome, Germany, Russia, France, UK, etc. They're always the suits, often in disguise. TRUMP himself should've been put in prison decades ago.
6
Pretty sure trump did a bang up job of hurting the presidency all by himself.
7
Is this a joke? Beware of impeachment, because later presidents will think twice about abusing their office?
5
What about the harm to the Presidency in the long term when foreign leaders know of a President's corruption, crimes and even treason yet see the leaders of his/her own nation afraid to do anything about such?
3
According to you, first torture is legal, and now a president engaging in wrongdoing deserves cover.
Really Dr. Yoo?
8
I refer you to the Aesop’s Fable, ‘The Boy Bathing.”
A boy bathing in a river was in danger of being drowned. He called out to a passing traveler for help, but instead of holding out a helping hand, the man stood by unconcernedly, and scolded the boy for his imprudence. “Oh, sir!” cried the youth, “pray help me now and scold me afterwards.” The boy drowned. The moral of the story-
The time to give a lecture on fire safety isn’t when the house is on fire and the flames are spreading down the block...aka there are times where the only course left to take is to take action in order to preserve a foundation built on years of wise counsel.
3
Silly article, but not surprised (see torture memos). Trump not conducting foreign policy, he’s conducting personal business. Constitution inapplicable (except impeachment provision).
5
This entire article would have some merit if we didn’t have a president who could care less about the country and its people. Normally I would completely agree with the premise but with the current occupant it’s a ridiculous argument
1
Too late! Presidency has already been besmirched. Have not had a lot of respect for Mr. Yoo's legal opinions since around 2002:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo#Legal_opinions
1
So sick of being told to be afraid of Trump.
He’s the biggest bully there ever was. We are not afraid.
8
John Yoo - You have it so very very wrong. Not challenging the crooked Trump is what would damage the presidency and the nation. Just how is allowing Trump unlimited rope to hang us all a good idea? Trump is a behaving like a mobster. It's time to treat him like the mobster he imagines himself to be and put him away. Trump has crossed every line - let him continue we risk enabling "President For Life". John Yoo - you have lost it. Time to retire.
7
In support of the George W. Bush administration, Mr. Yoo used twisted, hairsplitting logic to write a legal opinion supporting the outrageous assertion that it as OK for the US to torture people. His piece in today's NYT is more of the same kind of pretzel logic. He seems to be arguing that the President is above the law.
I'm reminded of Has Christian Anderson's parable about the Emperor's New Clothes. Wake up Mr. Yoo: Donald Trump - a modern day, would be emperor - is naked in all his ugliness for all to see if we will only look without bias.
10
Wow....John Yoo is a Trump shill placing his own spin on our Constitutional orders. There are still extreme right winged conservatives who believe Nixon should not been impeached but happily condoned the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Nixon for trying to subvert our election and Clinton for lying about a sexual affair. Hmmmm....I wonder which incident was demoralizing for our country?
5
It is "harming the presidency" to let an unstable and amoral person to remain in office.
4
So, what do you call someone who can act unilaterally and impunity without accountability? King? Emperor?
2
Uh, excuse me, what foreign policy??? and what ability to conduct it or "protect the nation" ??? Trump is not only corrupt to the bone, he has violated the law and constitution in a myriad of ways, has shown signs of psychotic behavior, done damage to our relations with our closest foreign allies and our standing in the world, and has instigated hate and violence against his own citizens. He is a danger to our nation and the entire world's health and security. If not for our unprincipled and spineless lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, an impeachment inquiry would have happened as soon as he took office.
4
Agree. Just vote him out!
Mr Yoo: Get it together. This president has done more to diminish and damage the office than a dozen impeachments would do. Don’t both sides this. Any president (of any party) who is corrupted by another country’s strongman, who enriches himself at the public’s expense and who has conspired with foreign leaders and unscrupulous henchmen to win the election and obstruct the investigation of same deserves impeachment by Congress and removal from office. You’re a criminal, you get kicked out of office. Period.
3
Perhaps a quick waterboarding of the president can wring the truth out of him. As you have noted before waterboarding is not torture and perhaps we actually can get to the truth out of him legally (according to your learned knowledge).
13
Was he singing this tune when Republicans impeached Clinton? I seriously doubt it.
4
A just impeachment: "It Could Hurt the Presidency". That's like warning that putting out a raging house fire will cause water damage. Wake up Yoo!
5
Article 2 Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Would not bribery be enough?
18 U.S. Code § 201. Bribery of public officials and witnesses
Seems pretty clear
1
"Beware of Impeaching Trump. It Could Hurt the Presidency."
Very funny, John Yoo. You are the guy who said that waterboarding is not torture, so your credibility is seriously in question, particularly when it comes to matters of law (even though you claim to teach law).
The thing hurting the presidency is a guy named Donald Trump.
10
The entire world, allies and enemies await the end of chapter trump. I feel we must have faith in the majority of Americans do not wish to have a grifter and con-man criminal as president.
2
Did impeaching Clinton do long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation?
6
The Dems had better make sure that they have Trump red handed this time. If not, all hope is lost until 2024 and beyond.
2
Oh Mr. Yoo, you could have a future in comedy.
1
"The Constitution trusts the American people, acting through the ballot box, to render judgment on President Trump. Democrats should trust the framers’ faith in the American people, too."
The Constitution of the United States has always been a multiple choice document. We have a history of civilized, christian American's supporting killing, lying, stealing, Slavery, interment camps, and Jim Crow. We have a history of the US judiciary, federal, state, and local governments supporting these atrocities.
The Presidency has already been damage; Mr. Yoo, you are handwringing about the wrong thing. Good grief
2
Why does this sound like blaming the victim?
1
Anyone who thought Bill Clinton should be impeached for lying about sex but is arguing that the current situation doesn’t at least merit an inquiry is nothing more than a partisan hack.
8
I stopped reading at:
"even one who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing"
4
"Hurting" the imperial Presidency is a great reason to impeach Trump.
1
How did impeaching Richard Nixon hurt the Presidency, Professor Yoo?
Proceed. We're all ears.
2
Are you already auditioning for William Barr’s job?
7
I would be curious where you stood with respect to Clinton's impeachment.
1
Aren't you the advisor who said it was ok to torture combatants that we captured in the war on terror?
7
Arguing against impeaching a clearly corrupt, lawless, and oftentimes violent (I.e. kids in cages) executive by asserting a reactionary hypothetical is miles from a good faith argument.
2
Just what ability to conduct foreign policy are we talking about? Have I missed something??
1
I see. So you know a way of making an omelet without breaking an egg. Kindly enlighten.
2
Sir, we have passed Go and now stand at the last resort.
1
John Yoo is soooooo wroooong! This president deserves to be impeached and his traitorous actions revealed to the people in even greater detail than the Mueller report. Enough is enough!
66
I truly believe the framers never in a million years envisioned a Trump presidency.
Hamilton especially believe those elected would put the country about all else. I do not believe that Trump has once put the country ahead of his personal needs. Not once!
59
The framers of the Constitution are probably rolling in their graves. Even they would admit that the fact that millions of Americans voted for an ignorant and unqualified person like Donald Trump to be President demonstrates that in this case voters alone cannot be trusted to render appropriate judgment on the President. Nor, it seems, can this country afford to have Trump remain in office any longer than he absolutely has to. Impeachment is like the fire extinguisher behind the glass for use in case of an emergency. It's time to break the glass.
39
Proponents of the unitary executive go to the Federalist Papers as gospel. The greatness of the Constitution is in the ability to allow people of the future to make changes that allow true Democracy to be preserved. The Bill of Rights was the response of those who read the Federalist Papers and feared the abuses of rights that were possible in these written views
17
This is a wonderful history and law lesson by an obviously intelligent, experienced, and eloquent author. I don't doubt its grounding in fact, careful analysis, and critical thought.
At the same time, I find it worrisome that someone like Professor Yoo could write this piece with nary an acknowledgement of the position in which our country currently exists.
America's founding fathers were––by and large––brilliant men. They were not, however, infallible or capable of divining the future, nor was the government they built perfect or complete. They certainly never thought so, at least.
Thus, this entire column rings hollow to me and those of my friends who have read it. Sure, it's interesting to know how things might ideally work, or the way our system was designed to function and why, along with potential future pitfalls of present acts. But frankly, we're so far from ideal, as-designed, or even rational right now that I legitimately don't know what to do with the information presented here.
Donald Trump is the President of the United States. Regardless of Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, or any other founder's feelings on the matter, or the possibility that present actions/changes might impact a future president or government, I want Trump monitored and held accountable now. For me, concerns based on our founding ideals or future hypotheticals take a far back seat to fears about current corruption, our government's legitimacy, and our ability to survive this executive.
43
The devastating effect of bias upon reason and balance is amplified in the political sphere. Professor Yoo is blinded by his conservative bend to comprehend what this President has done to the Presidency. He looks for a specific high crime or misdemeanor and misses the egregious overwhelming series of Trump's daily crimes and misdemeanors - akin to death by a thousand cuts (not all of them tiny in this case).
The stated price of impeachment is nothing compared to the continuing damage inflicted upon the institution every second that Trump remains in office. I, for one, will gladly risk weakening the institution to rid this nation immediately of this wretched man.
34
Trump should have been impeached a long time ago. This latest revelation is only the latest example of the continuous onslaught of abuse and violation of power that has defined this presidency. It's a disgrace in the eyes if the world and a mockery of our constitution. The enablers of this "president" have done irreparable harm to this country.
27
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security."
No one is rushing into Impeachment. It's been on the table for over a year now. The president has a long history of behavioral problems that warrant, if nothing else, considering the matter, which has been done ad nauseam. Whether the office of the president is being harmed is almost beside the point, since Trump has demonstrated himself to have little regard for the law or for harm he does to his own foreign policy through his own actions. In other words, if you think impeachment is a bridge too far, then why give the president so much leeway?
Besides that, the only reason we're hearing about this phonecall is because a Trump appointee agreed with a lower-level staff member that it was a cause for concern. So it's not as if there's no justification. If it turns out that nothing untoward happened, then it still remains that Trump's behavior with regard to foreign policy is consistently- to put it mildly- worrisome.
Finally I would submit that because this is not a "normal" administration there may not be such a drastic effect on our national politics, long-term. Trump is a singular brand, and no other president will be considered equivalent. In other words- the rules don't apply to him, so what happens now is not necessarily going to be reflected in the future.
27
What a foolish argument. What has done the most harm to the presidency is Trump's disdain for accountability. Not holding him accountable for corrupt foreign policy, on the grounds that his conversation with a foreign power was "confidential" will only harm it more. That conversation was not true foreign policy, it was blatant and defiant abuse of power and self- serving corruption, like Trump has demonstrably done dozens of times before. The conversation was exposed by a whistle-blower, and Trump has admitted to and bragged about his corrupt actions, assuming he will not be held accountable. At long last, maybe he will. This will not hurt the office of the presidency; it just may salvage it.
33
Yoo complains that impeaching Trump would damage the national security. Instead he proposes
"The House could meet any stonewalling by cutting intelligence, military and diplomatic funding."
Shutting down DOD, State Dept, and all intelligence agencies is a ridiculous alternative which would cause infinitely more damage to the national security of the country.
22
Professor Yoo isn't being honest with his readers.
The office of the president has changed dramatically since the country was formed. In the course of large scale wars and other modern events it has become an imperial position with powers that exceed those of a mere "executive".
As the position became more empowered, members of both the Senate and the House have wavered back and forth between willingly transferring their authority to the executive branch and expressing alarm that the executive's powers are excessive. Prof. Yoo seems to lie in the camp that believes a president should have full unquestioned authority and that the other branches just get in the way when they have other ideas. Where he becomes dishonest in his argument is that he specifically wishes for authoritarian presidents to have full power, while avoiding any mention that those he disagrees with politically probably should be constrained from below.
Beliefs like his are exactly why the powers of our government were specifically defined in the Constitution. I find it curious that a professor of law should so easily and conveniently misunderstand that no one is above the law.
23
The presidency has already been irrevocably damaged by Trump; the system of checks and balances has been irrevocably damaged by McConnell. The two have clearly demonstrated that this much power should never again be concentrated in the hands of only two individuals, whether they be saints or sinners. The Constitution was meant to be a living document that would be changed through the Amendment process to reflect a changing world. Seems like it is time to make some changes to it again.
12
Stephen from Salt Lake City says in these comments: "Congressional offices are at greater risk if congress doesn't impeach, than the presidency is if they do."
To me, that is the bottom line. Mr Yoo's hesitancy is irrelevant, his arguments feeble. So much damage has already been done to the office at this point, it's a bit like worrying that the firemen are going to soil the carpet as they put out the fire in the ceiling. We can still save something to rebuild upon if we act now. This is hardly a "rush" to anything, it's been fully ripe for action for many months.
15
Professor Yoo fails to note the damage done to the office of the president has been done by one single incompetent and selfish man who has never thought about protecting the country only himself. It is the job of congress to check a man offering foreign powers military might in exchange for information to damage his opponents. It is an abdication of responsibility to let Mr. Trump continue his illegal and personally enriching activities. His tweets, his insults, his corruption have all damaged the office.
10
While I appreciate Professor Yoo's concerns, there is no evidence that the Occupant know how to effectively manage foreign relations or protect the country. He does, however, know how to protect himself, perhaps at the expense of the country.
14
Yoo says "The intelligence community works for the president, not the other way around."
No, the intelligence community members take an oath to the country and the Constitution. It is supposed to work for the good of the country, not work for a president by covering up for him or telling him what he wants to hear, not their best analysis.
31
Yoo’s analysis ignores the fact that the President has resisted and stonewalled all attempts at oversight to date, leaving the House with no alternative.
If the president had offered or agreed to make all relevant information available to a bipartisan congressional committee that could review it in private - the conditions under which whistle blower reports are intended to be reviewed - the House wouldn’t be moving towards impeachment.
17
The electoral college is the manifestation of distrust in the American people. Moreover, the Federalist Papers, and a number of political texts written of the era, express their reservations on man's natural character-- hence constitutional republicanism, hence the system of check's and balances, hence the article to impeach, hence the original qualifications for enfranchisement.
The soul of our nation rests in civil war, the umbrella with which we all come to think and know the character of the human being is under the guise and fear of civil war. Liberalism is the embodiment of distrust, and private property is the physical solution to alleviate public disputes. I'm sorry, but there is no trust in the public in our constitution, in liberalism. Moreover, I have no trust in voting to be the remedy because of lackluster civic education, voter suppression in over 20 states, gerrymandering, dismal voter turnout, large corporate money in politics, and authoritarian-esque attempts of right wing media to disillusion, spread false narratives, and subvert reality and truth.
To express such sentiments, particularly the one of patience and entrusting the populous is to operate from privilege, because suppressed voices do not have time against violence, or a means to express their citizen rights. There are lives at stake in this conversation, and it encapsulates much more than bribery.
3
The Supreme Court has said in an 1866 decision, that the nation has “no right to expect that it will always have wise and humane rulers, sincerely attached to the principles of the Constitution. Wicked men, ambitious of power, with hatred of liberty and contempt of law, may fill the place once occupied by Washington and Lincoln.” So they considered someone like trump would come along, but I don't think they expected the country would accept the situation.
18
"We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation."
Under Trump - "Foreign policy" has been redefined as strong-arming both enemies and allies to "find 30K emails" and "investigate Biden" to influence our elections.
Under Trump - "Protect our nation" is now abandoning our NATO alliances, currying favor with KJU and MBS, who tortured and caused the deaths of American students and journalists.
Trump has, in little more than 2 years, already done long-term damage to the office. Everything available must be done to expel him and reset its valid constitutional purpose.
17
"The Constitution trusts the American people, acting through the ballot box, to render judgment on President Trump. Democrats should trust the framers’ faith in the American people, too."
I would believe this, but our Electoral College system does not allow the people to directly render judgment. That is how we have Trump in the first place.
9
@AA
We need the electoral college.. without it California and New York sate would run the Presidential election board.. leaving the rest of the states without a voice.
The presidency has too much power and little checks that work. Trump ran with the "sitting president can't be indicted" and how his lawyers are arguing that they can't even be investigated. Makes oversight by Congress impossible.
And those checks on the president speaking privately to other leaders? Well we still don't know what or who Trump promised something to.....Putin about Ukraine? Possibly.
When one man speaks for our nation as our representative....we have a right to have accurate records as what he has committed us to. We are the taxpayers and soldiers that will actually pay or fight.
3
I wish they decided to impeach Trump for shutting down the Country for 3 weeks in January. It was not a power mentioned in the Constitution, and would be hard to deny. Why is Congress making things difficult for itself?
7
I wish Yoo would worry about the country and the Constitution as much as he worries about the presidency. (Same advice for Bill Barr.) The presidency is one of three co-equal branches; it is not the paramount branch. Also, the individual who occupies the office at any given moment should not be confused with the office itself. The current occupant is the one who is threatening the presidency with his brazen disregard for the constitutional requirements of the office and his aggressive abuses of power.
12
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security."
Rushing? I had the impression that our elected representatives were dragging their feet, certainly not rushing. Back in May, after the release of the Mueller report, I sent e-mails to the two Michigan senators (Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters), asking them where they stood on impeachment. Neither of them answered; I guess they first wanted to see which way the wind was blowing.
[Gary Peters, I believe, is up for re-election next year; not with my vote, though.]
6
I don't think anything could hurt the office of the presidency as much as Trump already has.
25
@Ann
Wait 10 years...
Seems to me that Trump is the one damaging the presidency. He should have been impeached a year ago. He disgraces the office he holds everyday and puts this country at risk!
6
The truly unfortunate part of all of this is that we are ultimately at the will of those citizens living in the South and Midwest, who seem to have lost all sense of reality. As for the self-serving Evangelicals, it's hopeless. Maybe Warren, a good Southern/Midwesterner, from meager roots, can bring us back to some sane vision of the future that doesn't involve billionaire steal all the US Treasure, while selling us out to The Russian.
7
The framers had questionable faith in the ability of Americans to always make the "right" choice in choosing a president. Hence, the inability of Americans to choose their own senators until the 20th century AND the tangled mess of the Electoral College which originally besides giving slave states more proportional votes, was intended as a "check" on the general electorates choice. (Which at that time was only white, landowners.) The U.S. presidency has become too imperial, especially under Barr and McConnell's and Trump's brazen onslaught.(And the DOJ's flawed policy of refusing to indict a sitting president.) It's time to check the presidency a bit and remind that branch it must work in conjunction with Congress and the Judiciary ethically, not as an independent autocrat. Besides, Trump's foreign policy amounts to Twitter proclamations and bullying. A better and more competent president would not have torn apart the State Department and bled it dry of an experienced and well educated diplomatic core.
3
I thought this was the Onion for a second. Is Yoo serious? "Democrats may regret again wounding the presidency"
No one has done that except Trump and not holding him accountable for Treasonous behavior at this point is what would additionally harm the office of the President and our very Democracy.
You understand that this was not a normal call right, that he pushed a foreign country to investigate his political rival? There is absolutely no evidence that the Bidens did anything wrong and so there is no excuse for Trump to even bring that up.
Does Yoo actually believe the President is all powerful and answers to no one, does he not support checks and balances in our government? This IG who reviewed the whistle blowers report is a highly respected man appointed by Trump himself and he did his job and continues to feel strongly that this was not a President conducting foreign relations, that the evidence shows his behavior was a threat to the country and the report must go to Congress.
Trump already harmed our ability to conduct foreign policy by embracing dictators and damaging relationships with our allies, all done in the name of his own power grab and wanting to be elected and now re-elected. You don't court foreign influence in an election if you are acting in country's best interests.
This is exactly what impeachment is for, one of the only ways to hold a President accountable for betraying his country, which he has now done multiple times.
11
Oh yeah, and if I follow Yoo's point, it means future presidents may not be able to blackmail foreign leaders as easily if we hold this one accountable. I'll take it.
13
Professor Yoo,
While I appreciate the and support the idea that the President's ability to to conduct foreign policy is critical to th protection of our nation and the advancement of US foreign policy goals.
Mr. Trump did none of that. His conduct actually was against the interests of the United States security and our foreign policy objectives. Providing military aid to Ukraine is in the national interest, because it pushes back against Russian aggression, and supports the position of our NATO allies. Ukraine wants the military aid as well - it i snot being forced to take the assistance. Mr. Trump, however, put his own interests ahead of the nation. He threat only served his own political interest. If Ukraine refused the President, and ended not taking the aid and perhaps striking a deal with Russia or some other country for assistance or relief, how would that have served US interests?
There is nothing Presidential about what he did. To the contrary, he acted like a mobster, and attempted to coerce conduct from the Ukraine to serve his political agenda. The idea that the President did not solicit the involvement or assistance of Russia for his political gain is now clearly an absurdity, because if he is willing to engage in extortionist behavior to secure political assistance, it is silly to think he wouldn't have gladly solicited and accepted Russian assistance in getting elected.
1
The damage to the presidency has already been done — by the President. The only way to salvage the office is for Mr Trump to resign immediately or for Congress to exercise it’s prerogatives.
Let's all forget about Iran. They will figure it out. Great diversion before the election next year. The issues won't be discussed and we'll have Trump's impeachment 24/7/412. We won't have to think about a dithering 77 year old with a face lift and tons of videos of him touching up females young and old. Do you think his advisors would be able to run the country? Just sign here Mr. Biden. It's for the invasion of Iran.
All I had to do was read the author's title of his article to know that it was not worth reading the article.
Impeachment process is part of the "checks and balances". Otherwise, the U.S. could fall to totalitarian rule.
Real simple. Thank our forefathers!
6
I fail to see how the impeachment of trump could hurt the presidency more than he himself has hurt it.
3
It would be lovely to be able to trust the President. When a President has resisted all oversight, exploited the Presidency for personal financial gain, antagonized allies, revealed classified information to enemies, told thousands of lies, denied science, appointed corrupt and conflicted cabinet secretaries, and blocked any meaningful action on climate change for years despite increasingly frequent natural disasters, he does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Presidential power cannot be absolute or we no longer have a democracy.
I would like to hear from Mr. Yoo whether he thinks that grossly criminal behavior would be acceptable for four years from a president who couldn't be stopped because of absolute immunity to prosecution and ability to block any review of evidence. What if a President engaged a foreign power to act unlawfully to keep him in office, say by hacking voting machines? Would a President's conversations with the foreign power in which he arranged the hack be completely covered by executive privilege?
Mr. Yoo - what protection do the American people have if the President is not subject to oversight by Congress?
2
How much damage does trump have to do to the presidency, the US Constitution, and the nation before we stop wringing our hands and get on with it?
2
Professor Yoo, I propose a deal. Trump is waterboarded, admits to malfeasance and is promised immunity when he resigns. His private Trump business dealings will be of no federal interest.
OK?
6
I don't think that the Founding Fathers believed that anyone like Trump would end up being president.
1
Trump is taking a hatchet to the foundation of our democratic government when he asks a foreign country to interfere with our elections. The wealth of corporate oligarchs, which already distorts our elections, is nothing compared to what a foreign government can bring to bear in terms of limitless money and personnel--all working to tilt an American election. That scenario strikes me as far more dangerous to our national security than the effects of impeachment on a president's foreign policy negotiations.
Take the scenario a little farther. The foreign government agrees to the president's illegal request--and afterwards the foreign government can blackmail the president over it. How's that for harm to our national security?
1
John Yoo is suggesting that a criminal in the White House shouldn’t be impeached because that will lead to non-criminal presidents being impeached? What, exactly does he think should happen to a criminal? If someone breaks into his home to burglarize it, I expect he will use the same logic and leave him alone to prevent the arrest of any future non-burglars who might enter his home.
3
One assumes if Professor Yoo's house was on fire he'd insist the Firemen not use fire hoses to extinguish the flames because of the potential for water damage.
3
Prof Yoo, your premise is simply not logical. It borders on absurdity. The safeguards in the constitution were tailor made for Donald Trump presidencies. Is there anybody that thinks Donald Trump is a straight shooter? Only that group of Republicans that who care more about the big three than democracy. (Big three: tax cuts, deregulation, military equipment for everyone) Clearly Trump warrants impeachment. He has from day 1.
1
Impeachment would certainly have its risks but what about the risks of keeping this terrible man in the White House. The risk to our democracy, to our climate, to our alliances and to our planet in so many ways.Repuplicans are complicit and hopefully will have that albatross hung around there necks to the their dying days.
Impeachment is indeed "a last resort" as Mr. Yoo points out. But we are at that point
Bribing a foreign government to commit an illegal act. If that's what happened, it sure seems to fit within the definition of "treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors." How can a responsible Congress not act?
1
Here is the big problem.
In 2016, with the primaries over, Trump's top campaign staff - including his own son - met with emissaries from Russia offering to help the Trump campaign by providing "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. When Trump became President, he ordered the FBI Director to stop an investigation into his campaign's ties to Russia and then fired that FBI Director for not obeying his order to stop that investigation.
And when Trump's hand-picked Attorney General, William Barr, first misled the public about the Mueller report totally exonerating Trump, and then defended what Trump did as perfectly acceptable, Trump decided to extort the Ukraine to help him with the 2020 campaign.
Mr. Yoo, if Trump is NOT impeached, what do you think Trump will do next? Shoot someone on Fifth Avenue? Trump said people who supported him like John Yoo will be fine with that, too. No doubt John Yoo will write an op ed saying there was nothing wrong with that murder.
Trump said his supporters would be fine with him shooting someone on Fifth Avenue and John Yoo pretty much proves Trump was right. Shameful bit of condoning wrongdoing by the President, Mr. Yoo. And like Attorney General Barr's actions to cover up Trump's last corruption and say it was fine, we can only imagine what Trump would do if he gets away with this. With John Yoo by his side saying "you are above any law, Mr. President".
I'm guessing Mr. Yoo wants to be the next Supreme Court Justice!
1
Not buying it Prof. Yoo. A eighth grader could have conducted foreign policy as well as Trump, who gave security information to our potential enemies. The same sort of argument was made about Nixon and Watergate. Doesn't hold water.
Trump has single-handedly caused our country to lose respect across the world and enhance the positions of our largest potential enemies--Russian and China. Time for the incompetent blowhard-in-chief to exit!
1
Impeachment exists for exactly this purpose -- to remove from office a President who serves himself rather than the country as evidenced by the commission of "treason, bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors". Both the presidency and the country are harmed by allowing a President who is contemptuous of the law.
1
I would think that the American people want to impeach Trump not the presidency.
2
Surely this a joke!
(If not, then we have to ask: Is there ANYTHING Mr. Yoo wouldn’t do to advance his career; to attract attention; to curry favor with right-wing donors?)
6
Yoo seems to prefer the apparent security of defending an incipient tyrant to embracing legal, democratic, and civil change.
To use Yoo's own language, Trump has "wounded" truth, reason, civility, science, and above all law and morality.
Trump deserves the worst and the best solution is what concerns the country, not Trump's party or his own pathology or even his Presidency.
To be frank, Tump deserves to be impaled (if not physically then metaphorically), not just impeached. He is a great danger while still in power and no amount legal casuistry can deny that fact.
2
John Yoo. You are correct. Impeachment IS the last resort. The American people are fed up with the constant overreach of Trump. We elected a President, not a King. It's time he hears the two magic words: "You're Fired!"
7
Impeding this president from carrying out his duties is probably the best thing we as a nation can do. His performance has been despicable in so many ways, particularly as it relates to international relations. Here is a man who takes pride in his ignorance, refuses to educate himself, to read, to articulate effectively in the English language, to engage with science. Instead, he sells snake oil, belittles his adversaries, and insults the intelligence of any thinking human being. It is preferable to keep him ineffective.
1
We are a nation of laws. If Professor Yoo would prefer an autocracy, there are several other countries I might suggest. Russia, China, and Saudi Arabia come immediately to mind.
We will be glad to be rid of him.
3
Trump did tell America that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and his supporters would be fine with it.
I'm guessing John Yoo would write an op ed saying that we should ignore the crime and just wait until the next election. And if Trump wins and decides to murder a lot more people? I'm guessing John Yoo would hope his appointment as to the Supreme Court would keep his family safe while Trump murders whoever he wants with Yoo saying "just wait until the next election".
2
Professor Yoo seems to be doing what Republicans in the House and the Senate have already been doing for a long time and will probably do even more in the days and weeks to come, which is preventing the light of Justice from seeing into the dark recesses of the Office of the President. Impeachment is the only choice that We the People have to reign in a "wannabe" despot. Yoo has been obsessed with preserving and increasing presidential power for a long time. What has this desire got us? A reckless and inept leader named Donald Trump. I really don't care to hear how Yoo feels right now.
5
This guy? Really? Yes, because unfettered executive authority has served us so well through the last two Republican administrations.
11
Given all that has happened with Trump as POTUS, all the mistakes, ignorance, disrespect, failures, and insults, I think the world will forgive the USA if we're able to SHUT DOWN this horrific man. Once we get a normal, decent, civil, thoughtful, intelligent, dynamic individual as POTUS, the world will sigh a huge breath of relief. We can rebuild the trust.
1
@GaryK
Unfortunately, the rather large question that comes to mind is even if Trump disappeared tomorrow, the judges he has put in place and the enormous amount of money corrupting American politics and its influence will take at least a generation to undo(if it can be undone at all).
Trump was 40 years in the making and we see that The Republican Party is at least as corrupt as him.
The world is now looking at America with a "Spockian Eyebrow", because they know considering the number of people that supported him there could be just another one like him waiting in the wings.
1
This is the same John Yoo who reduced our civil liberties during George W Bush realm. And he is worried about the Constitution?
13
Long term harm?! Democrats don't care about the long term. Just like they don't care about long term harm to the judiciary when they attacked Bork, Thomas and Kavanaugh.
All they care about is pushing another duly elected Republican President out of office by any means possible. Just like they did to Nixon.
@Jack Dancer
Newt Gingrich did the same to Bill Clinton, remember? He said he did it because he could. Of course, this was all at the same time Gingrich was having his own affair, carried on in the staff parking lot between meetings.
Nonsense! Where was all this pious conjecture about weakening the presidency during Ken Starr's investigation? Me thinks it's simply more fear-mongering from a GOP beholden think tank.
2
Get a grip, Professor - there will be no foreign policy to protect if a president can rule the country by whim, deceit, blackmail or extortion. The president is a one-man crime wave, and should be impeached, removed and then prosecuted — and he's replaced by someone who respects the office first.
3
John Yoo is the 2001 winner of the Federalist Society Paul M. Bator award, a member of the Federalist Society like about 5% of all American lawyers, 5 out of 9 of the members of the U.S. Supreme Court and about 80% of Trump Federal Court appointees.
7
@EqualJustice
Agenda maybe? It seems Mr. Yoo has not come to grips with the fact that this President has no foreign policy and even if he tried he would fail miserably at it. His strange relationships with Russia and North Korea along with the almost full alienation of all America's long-time allies confirms it.
Clearly, Mr Yoo has not been paying attention.
1
The president, the security agencies, the diplomatic corps, the military: they all work for us. US. And we, through our Congress (House and Senate) are granted oversight over the President and all those other persons, topped only, perhaps, by the Supreme Court.
Attempting to use damage of the Presidency to check the Congress' right to investigate, and to impeach, threatens the key principle that even the President is not above the law, and not exempt from investigation and accountability. I am beyond tired of the GOP and its associates, such as Mr. Yoo, providing cover to protect an already far too Imperial presidency.
This is the bottom line: are Presidents accountable to us, or are we merely dominated by them? The issue of our democratic principles depends on the answer.
17
Mr. Yoo's interpretations of presidential power were flexible enough to legitimize torture. Given that track record, there is little reason to take his views on the Constitution seriously. Besides, this is not a matter of interfering with a president's war powers, and we don't really know what the whistleblower is complaining about. The complaint may well be one that does relate directly to the intelligence community. Even Yoo concedes that pressing a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political opponent is impeachable, yet he lacks the courage of his own conviction on this matter and recommends some sort of secret proceeding that would never satisfy the American people. I, for one, have had my fill of Yoo.
46
War is foreign policy, and only Congress can declare it. Trade agreements between the US and foreign nations are foreign policy, but Congress must ratify them. International aid is foreign policy, but Congress must disburse the funds.
The President is not intended to have carte blanche. The framers were more afraid of despotism than anything else. The Constitution trusts the American people so much it includes the Electoral College to stifle the popular vote. This led almost directly to President Trump.
7
Impeachment is getting to look like just another Democrat campaign strategy; that is not what the framers of the constitution intended it to be. Why have Democrats found it necessary to start an official inquiry? Because their political program is not catching fire, they're having a hard time figuring out how they'll win with it in 2020 so, deflect attention from that, make the campaign about Mr. Trump--voters should not reward Democrats for that.
1
Hmm. So the Democrats are putting words in Trump's mouth when he says he asked a foreign leader to investigate Biden?
Yoo writes "But Congress cannot subject the president to the supervision, control or review of a subordinate officer."
Mr. Yoo, Who, then, will hold a president accountable when that president attempts to extort, coerce and collude with a foreign government for political favors? Certainly not Mr. McConnell.
And if a "subordinate officer," who also took an oath to protect our Democracy and Constitution, is the one who observes the violation, then the "subordinate officer" is obligated to come forward. That's why there is a process.
Then Congress has the duty to investigate that charge. This unforced error may have more tentacles than we know. How many foreign governments has trump solicited favors from?
trump applauds himself as a 'negotiator.' Our Congress was against giving Saudi Arabia our nuclear plant plans. But trump over-rode and approved the transfer.
What will Saudi Arabia do for trump in return?
trump loves North Korea's Kim. trump is not levying sanctions against Kim who is still developing nuclear weapons and testing ballistic missiles like it's the 4th of July.
What will Kim give trump in return?
What will Russia give trump in return for 4 more years?
12
Doing nothing hurts worse.
Doing nothing compounds the hurt caused by a President who believes himself to be free of consequences from his multiple violations of norms and laws.
The unitary executive was feared at the founding of this country, that that would lead to the return of the rights of kings.
The Presidency is not unbound. Only thus far the Senate has shirked its role, allowing grievances and harms to build, to fester and grow. And here we are. At this moment.
3
Trump is harming the presidency and national security, not impeachment. It is the only chance of restoring our reputation and honor, in fact.
7
When a trustworthy person with an adult understanding of the world and with demonstrated allegiance to US values conducts foreign policy, I’m not concerned.
Trump is none of those things.
7
"The Constitution trusts the American people, acting through the ballot box, to render judgment on President Trump"
And what information will they have to base their judgement on? This administration has stonewalled most requests for information. Maybe an impeachment proceeding will reach behind that wall. Nothing else seems able to.
8
The presidency will be hurt if Trump is NOT impeached, and specifically impeached as opposed to being voted out. The rule of law - and the law in this case is the constitution - must be absolutely primary; the president has been violating the constitution without check since day one of his ill-begotten presidency. This is not just an 'imperial' presidency but an utterly law-breaking presidency and impeachment is the only way to illustrate this.
6
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security."
Like the harm hasn't been done. Trump and the GOP have done incalculable damage to democracy in America. We don't even know if the next election will be counted properly, if Trump will leave if voted out of office. And the GOP has ensured that it will win with all the gerrymandering it's done even if someone else wins the White House. The damage started in 1980.
5
Sorry professor, now that Trump has made it painfully obvious he intends to repeatedly and blatantly ignore the boundaries of common decency and fair play, the alternative to impeachment is to embolden future presidents who, among other high crimes and misdemeanors, choose to both invite foreign meddling in our elections and enrich themselves at the expense of hard working taxpayers. Not to mention what Trump himself would be likely to try and pull off in the absence of maximum pressure going forward.
5
It seems to me that this President actually makes the case that we will be doing long-term good in restricting the power of the Executive Office to conduct war and foreign policy. This President seems to have exposed all of the possible ways a criminally-minded individual can abuse executive power to undermine the constitutional authority of a duly elected Congress, which is far more representative of the actual will of the people. It's time to reign in Presidential power, as we have seen nearly every day since November 2016.
4
In this article, it sounds like Mr. Yoo is describing a king, not a president. And every legal theory I am aware of states that there is no privilege, constitutional or legal, that protects criminal conduct. In this case, it was the conversation itself that was the criminal or impeachable act.
On a lighter note, the timing of this article (was it pre-written?) with its frantic grasping for any legal straw to defend Trump with, reminds me of the old story of W.C. Fields reading the Bible on his deathbed "looking for loopholes." I think that is what Mr. Yoo is in effect doing here
6
Professor Yoo: The only one who is damaging the Presidency is Donald Trump. Given his pay-offs to two women to hide information that could be damaging to his campaign; sharing classified information with Russian officials; obstructing justice during the Mueller investigation; encouraging foreign governments to interfere in our elections; and now a quid pro quo scheme to have the Ukrainian President dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son that Trump can use to his political advantage in exchange for $400 million in aid that was previously committed.
4
A strong president with the capabilities to act in matters of importance that require immediate action, requires a president that operates in the world of the best available factual information. A president like Trump that lacks veracity was bound to abuse such a privileged trusted position. The position of the president has been and continues to be woefully hurt by the current occupant. Every day that passes the erosion goes on.
5
It is Trump and the Congressional Republicans debase and hurt the Presidency, the polity, the nation.
Not just in terms of domestic policies but also in terms of isolating the US by systematically damaging any Western Alliance and falling in love with characters like Putin and Kim; hollowing out any institution of government; and destroying institutional expertise.
4
Come on, Prof. Yoo. Can't those concerned about preserving flexible authority for the executive under the Constitution agree that investigating one's political opponents represents corrupt abuse of that authority and not legitimate foreign policy to advance national interests?
5
Professor Yoo is making a straw man argument. Congress is not trying to "regulate presidential discussions with foreign leaders." It is not trying "to seize the upper hand in foreign affairs." It is attempting to investigate credible claims of Mr. Trump mis-using his office and presidential powers to coerce a foreign government into investigating a political rival. I think that accusation, if substantiated, falls well within the boundaries of 'treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors." How does the President's need for confidentiality outweigh the need for Congress to investigate these claims?
5
Not every argument can/should be won with superior erudition and connect-the-dots word games. Some things are just wrong because they are wrong, and you don't need to be a law professor to figure it out.
The arguments made in this article are based on silly and dangerous assumptions and lead to even sillier and more dangerous conclusions.
To generalize:
Assume wrongly! ...
1. No employee of the government (exec branch) may report to Congress on actions directly taken by president in any way related to foreign policy w/o express permission of the president.
2. All government employees (exec branch) ultimately work for the president.
And given that wrong! assumptions, let's extrapolate:
Step 1) No employee of the government may report to Congress on actions directly taken by president w/o express permission of the president.
Step 2) No one may report to Congress on actions directly taken by president w/o express permission of the president.
Step 3) No one may report to Congress on actions taken by anyone working for president (i.e. anyone in government) w/o express permission of the president.
Step 4) What's Congressional oversight?
Finally, here is a better set of assumptions, if you don't mind.
President and the rest of exec branch employees work for us - the people.
Congress works for us - the people.
We - the people - want to make sure Congress holds this and any other president to account.
2
Although the ballot box is the ideal way to oust a bad President, extensive abuse of power by a sitting president is not something that should be taken lightly and cannot be overlooked if the presidency is to have any future legitimacy. The many abuses that Trump has committed in past 32 months may be overlooked if evaluated individually, but taken as a whole they show a president who does not have the ability to act as a responsible leader. This puts our country in terrible danger both politically (setting precedent) and militarily (bad judgement).
2
I don’t understand why Mr Yoo thinks this president wouldn’t continue to obstruct any and all investigations.
3
Nancy Pelosi has exhibited unbelievable restraint dealing with Trump. If Pelosi decides time is here, it's beyond here.
5
So the solution to getting a copy of the complaint is to cut funding for our intelligence agencies. Does Mr. Yoo think that would phase Trump? If Congress cut it to zero and every person in the CIA and NSA were laid off, Trump would still refuse to release anything that may put in in a bad light, and especially anything that may show criminal or impeachable activities. Trump would rather see us with no foreign intelligence agencies than admit he was wrong. I think Yoo got so much fun from authorizing waterboarding under Bush that he can no longer think straight.
7
I never suspected that the founding fathers of the United States had the ability of precognition! Still, it must have been a very long string for Jefferson and Washington to talk to the King of England.
China is a global power. It may not be a global military power but it probably could be if it decided to be. Instead it uses planning that is measured in years, not quarters.
The Federalist is NOT the US Constitution but idle ramblings of a few men seeking freedom to design their own fates from the Crown of England and without ending up being hung as traitors to that Crown.
The President sitting in a chair of power only because of the will of the majority of the people. It is not because he managed to enrich the party he belongs to or because the party he belongs to has set up the election in such a way that the electoral college hands over its votes into the party's hands.
This recent past election process has given more than enough room to doubt the integrity of the both the Presidency and the Republican party about their ability to participate in any process that does not involve a crime that would likely place any ordinary citizen in a criminal investigation and that is what is about to happen: a criminal investigation. Let's see how it works out for this guy who would be king if he could manage it. If he is cleared, so be it. The he and he alone, will be able to translate the law of the land.
1
Trump always gloats over his powers. He claims that it is absolutely appropriate to have the kind of conversations he has with foreign leaders. Although Mueller's investigation is not the trigger point for impeachment, there is ample evidence that this is the most corrupt president. He must be held accountable. The coterie of people around him or the party that he belongs will not call him out. Nor his supporters. This is a constitutional duty that the Congress and the Senate can't abdicate.
Professor Yoo is off mark here.
2
And so the President is free to collude with foreign governments to influence an upcoming Presidential election while under investigation for conspiring with foreign governments to influence the last presidential election and the remedy is, wait for it, the ballot box? Professor, I hate to break it to you, but rather it is you and your confederates that in fact represent the threat to our Republic, our Democracy, and our World.
3
We need to restore power to the PEOPLE - what good has come from these cover ups and secrets among so many, generally imperfect, narrow-focused men? Nothing.
We need to get back - or relaunch in this century - on the straight path of honesty, transparency, and the rule of law. Enough of men telling us all what we cannot know. Shameful that this would be a tagline after all the destructive and tragic actions trump has taken.
In history, so many men have betrayed what America should be with secrets, ego, and smoky rooms...SHE is a country that we must restore. America will rise again and she will make us proud.
Thank you Nancy Pelosi for being a honorable, respectable, and dignified leader.
2
It is absolutely astonishing that Yoo claims the president "is not a member of the intelligence community". He runs it, appoints the officers, and gets information from them on a daily basis. If that is 'not' being a member it is only because he is the head of it all. Or perhaps Yoo, realizing that Trump ignores all the briefings, feels he is de facto not a member?
2
This is not about the president's prerogatove to conduct foreign policy. This is about a 2020 presidential candidate who is currently the president pressuring a foreign government to find dirt on a political opponent. That's not conducting foreign policy and it's illegal.
2
Love the headline, Times: "Beware of Impeaching Trump. It Could Hurt the Presidency." Homage to the Onion? As for Mr. Yoo, he would do well to stay clear of comedy (in the guise of providing political advice) and stick to teaching law. Pelosi has dithered long enough. It's time to save the nation and restore our beleaguered standing in the world. It's time to impeach the president.
2
Too late, the office of president has already been harmed by the current occupant who is only in the office because of the founders flawed methodology of using the electoral college to determine the victor. Our current president's narcissistic personality disorder renders him unfit for executing the duties of the office, since he is capable only of self interest. Allowing that behavior to continue unchecked essentially makes Congress Co-conspirators. Just like an operation to remove a tumor, impeachment as a surgery will likely leave a scar on the Presidency, but at least the patient will survive.
1
What Trump is being accused of is extortion, not "conducting foreign policy." Extortion with tax payer money to compel a foreign country to investigate a political rival. That is the constitutional crisis, not John Yoo's pearl clutching.
2
This article is sophistry 101, and I'm amazed that the author is a professor at one of the top universities in the world. He only vaguely addresses the issue at hand: the POTUS using his position to go after political opponents. Instead, he uses several paragraphs to make the absurd point that being voted out of office in the next election (if that even happens) should be punishment enough for whatever crimes are committed. This is an argument for an imperial presidency, which is very far from what the founding fathers envisioned. Prof. Woo is more concerned with impeachment harming the presidency but doesn't provide a plausible alternative to impeaching a president that is harming the nation and the Constitution he is sworn to serve.
2
Professor Yoo seems to predicate his argument on the nation needing a strong president and a strong presidency. I believe a weak president and a weak presidency would be problematic, but a weaker presidency than what we currently have would be a boon. I believe the powers given to the executive were an oversight by the framers. Our system is far from perfect, and contrary to what many Americans believe, it's not even the gold standard for democratic republics or for constitutional insights.
We need to stop deifying our founding fathers. Americans are too religious by half. We have too great a propensity to look for Providence when none exists. The framers were no less fallible than men today. In fact, many of them would be criminals in today's world. Working the framer's intent into a discussion on what we should do today is insane. Who cares what they might have thought? It's completely irrelevant and brought up essentially as a false appeal to authority--a classic fallacy of logic.
Your arguments have to stand on their own merit or not stand at all. Professor Yoo should know that.
2
Yoo writes, "A president, even one who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing, must have confidence in the confidentiality of his communications...". How is he even allowed to be a law professor, let alone at Berkeley!
6
Unfortunately, Mr. Yoo will never see this comment, however it must be noted that there is an off a lot in his opinion article that does not compute. His main argument seems to be that whether or not a president is acting in a corrupt manner in dealing with foreign affairs, over which he has absolute and primary authority, that whatever those corrupt actions may be, whether on behalf of the United States or on the behalf of his own interests, can never warrant oversight nor should they warrant oversight, therefore weakening the presidency. I can’t say that argument makes any sense on a legal level, much less a moral one in the case of the United States versus Donald Trump. Mr. Yoo may retort that there is no need for a moral case, in which case we can safely say that the executive may act with impunity. Impunity is the situation where by law does not apply. Ultimately, Mr. Yoo is arguing that law does not apply to a president. He is certainly arguing that it does not apply under the US Constitution, which is even more shameful.
4
If this was a case of an isolated incident, I might see some credence to Mr. Yoo's argument. But the pervasive, abnormal and destructive behavior of this President leaves many of us willing to to throw Yoo's concerns out the window.
Nothing could do more damage to the prestige of and respect for the office of President than allowing Donald Trump to continue in that role.
2
‘Beware of Impeaching Trump. It Could Hurt the Presidency.‘
I’d have thought that hurting the presidency should be high on the to do list of any patriotic American.
I have been amazed at Trump’s power to disrupt and corrupt. Everyone should be interested in degrading the presidency so that the nation will never again be to so exposed to damage by the whims of a single individual.
1
First the torture memos written to validate waterboarding and other extreme methods of interrogation during the George Bush Jr administration. Now John Yoo seeks to protect a president who is making a joke out of our rule of law.
No thank you, Mr. Woo.
7
Trump has already damaged the presidency.
Impeachment will restore it.
We cannot have an autocrat.
We need a functioning congress that will step up and run the country on compromise and what is best for the majority of the people not the minority.
Every time Trump gets away with something, he grows more audacious and contemptuous of our constitutional norms.
He is pushing the limits and entering into dictatorship.
This is how it happens.
It happens slowly.
Incrementally.
Not overnight.
Congress, Dems and GOP, needs to hold him accountable.
Otherwise our Republic is on the brink of collapse.
Anyone who says otherwise and thwarts an investigation is being disingenuous out of a fear of loosing power.
1
John Yoo proves himself once again to be an authoritarian, willing to accept, aid, and abet any action by any president because it is the action of the Leader. Yoo's compromises with ethics and our constitution are well-known, but this new compromise, twisting the plain right and duty of the House into some kind of vague "damage" to the vague idea of "the presidency" is new. However, this is how many Americans will think, in simpler terms: "you're going after my Supreme Leader, whom I've been told by my lying Fox News propaganda, is in my corner, so I hate you for it."
I say, it's been a long time coming.
6
I find it difficult to take John Yoo's opinions with a grain of salt. During his career he lauded the notion of the unitary executive, in particular for Republican presidents wishing to launch wars, but labels the Clinton presidency an "imperial presidency" in matters not related to national security only personal behavior. There's no mention of an imperial presidency now, when this is the clearest case of such a thing in modern times, perhaps ever. And now he is fretting over damage to the presidency to act as an apologist of the most imperial and abnormal president ever. The current administration should give everyone pause over the damage a president can wreak and the threat to the republic when they engage in behavior well outside political norms. He has served in politically appointed roles, yet we are supposed to believe his opinion is that of a learned and impartial scholar. I don't believe him and I am surprised his opinion was published here.
3
The president has in so many ways gone for outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. He has destroyed the balance between the branches by saying in essence the he is the government and so can do what he want.
There is really little left unless we remove Trump now.
1
Mr Yoo legitimized the brutal interrogations during the George Bush administration. Yoo was the author of the infamous legal opinion that said " enhanced interrogation ", including waterboarding, was not torture. He continues his twisted concept of executive power in this column. His fundamental fallacy is his apparent assumption that Donald Trump is actually exercising legitimate presidential power instead of insidiously attempting to use his presidential power to punish a political rival.
7
Trump has attempted to use Appropriated Funds, in extortionist manner, to his own political ends,and not to that of Our Country. Trump cannot divert monies Congress has set aside for Ukranian defense for his own gain, rather than the Will of The People's, as expressed by Congressional action. Because Our Country is NOT a casino, Trump is NOT allowed to SKIM, or misappropriate, or hold in abeyance, Taxpayer monies for personal gain. Sadly, Trump is addicted to "OPM," a.k.a. "Other People's Money," as a way of "doing business." The quid-pro-quo Trump has tried to squeeze out of Taxpayer monies is political dirt, to help ensure his future prospects of re-election, which, in turn, keeps his D.C. hotel and his resorts prosperous. Prof. Yoo takes no account of these illegal behaviors!
2
Beware of NOT impeaching Trump. It has already hurt the presidency.
2
Please. Rushing to impeachment? Seriously? This president has committed so many impeachable acts, beginning with his earliest days in office, that one can hardly talk about “rushing” to hold him accountable. At least not with a straight face.
2
I'm sorry, but I have a hard time giving any credence to a lawyer who told Pres Bush that it's OK for the President to approve the torturing of human beings, as long as it's done under the ruse of "national security reasons"; and that it could be conducted without oversight or accountability to any other branch of our tripartite government.
He's using the same illogical argument here: Even if Trump is abusing his power in parts of what he does, investigating and holding him accountable for those crimes prevents him from doing the other parts of his job. Stupendously illogical!
4
I doubt ANYTHING could harm the position of POTUS more than having Trump in the position.
Mr. Yoo's argument fails the sniff test, as, it must be said, did his infamous "torture memo." The spirit of the law sustains the spirit of a Nation of laws. The letter of the law is clear, in spite of Mr. Yoo's rhetorical backflips, and so is its spirit. No American, especially those who hold elected office, is allowed to do dirty deals with foreign for political gain. The argument for how this bright line hampers the executive function is not made any clearer for Mr. Yoo's counterfactuals. Impeachment is every bit as valid a constitutional remedy as is periodic election, especially in the case of executive malfeasance and incompetence. We are in a state of emergency with this president. We need an emergent response. The politics will play out, and a President Pence will be no less hindered for it all, alas.
1
Spare me. Nothing could "hurt the Presidency" more than Trump already has.
What Mr Yoo seems to forget is that none of this applies to this president. This article speaks as if we are dealing with a rational, thinking, moral human being. We are not. These words of warning would serve ANY other body politic except the current one. We need to recognize we are dealing with a narcissist with some serious issues. No matter that he sits in the Oval Office, sleeps in the WH, dresses in the suit, goes to the meetings, he is a fake, an actor pretending to be president. He has no idea what it means to be president. Yes we need to be careful of the impact on our government, present and future, but that care must not lead to inaction when action is so very necessary.
We are past the point of no return with this president. Everyone knows it. Not everyone is willing to say it out loud...yet.
1
Wounding the presidency? Really? This cannot possibly be our nation's greatest concern right now. This entire opinion piece is filled with history, totally disconnected from our current crisis.
Oh, come on, John, give us a break. Many of us remember your role in circumventing checks on executive power when you penned the 'torture memos.' Please, spare us you righteousness ! It falls on deaf ears for anyone aware of your role in the expansion of executive power. No one is trying to limit the role of the President in conducting foreign policy-as far as is so far apparent, the issue is in using the Presidency for personal gain and electoral advantage. This is wrong, plain and simple.
3
Threatening to withhold foreign aid in exchange for generating negative publicity to hurt a political opponent in a Marican Presidential election... why Is Mr. John Yoo defending this action ? What does "the rule of law" mean to him ?
1
Professor Woo, champion of "The Imperial Presidency", seems to believe any action the Executive takes in foreign policy is beyond reproach.
It the President hires foreign agents to assassinate his political opponents in the United States, should he be allowed to do so, simply because he deems it "Foreign Policy"?
1
Unequivocally in disagreement with this author’s sentiment on presidential integrity. This is the same kind of thinking that allows for a resurgence of Nazism to be considered “free speech,” even though we, as a nation, devoted to send our brethren to war in quashing any upheaval of that hateful philosophy. In essence we said, that was not speech and were not acts to be tolerated in a free world. Similarly, the utility of foreign dignitaries in corrupting the office of the President of the United States is not so shallow an act that we ought to tolerate. Impeachment of this corrupt president is the only route necessary in restoring constitutional integrity to the highest office of our once sovereign nation.
10
American presidency lost its luster since LBJ but main damage was done by Nixon, Clinton, GWBush.
Trump is erecting tombstone for American presidency.
"We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation."
Nonsense! Many of Trump's foreign policy "initiatives" have either been failures or have actually compromised our national security.
If Donald John Trump has committed crimes he must be held to account. It's not like this is a spat over the definition of the word "is".
Is John Woo serious? A president that delights in mocking the law and congress is supposed to tiptoe around him? I’d sooner abolish the presidency than let it go unchecked.
Beware of NOT impeaching Trump. It could hurt the Presidency.
1
Trump has already damaged the presidency and the country.
1
Excuse me Mr Yoo I just want to get this straight.
You think Ms. Pelosi's actions are a danger to the office of the President. Not Trump's actions but Pelosi's, am I getting that right? And you're a law proffessor?
Wow.
1
Beware of John Yoo. He also has the ability to damage the presidency and harm our nation.
4
I would invite Professor Yoo to review the behavior and allegations, only instead of the name of the alleged perpetrator being ‘Trump’ substitute the name ‘Obama.’ If he can do so and still make these arguments, I will consider taking them seriously. Otherwise they are the musings of another sycophant who has no interest in preserving the fundamental principles of our democracy.
Professor Yoo,
As you said, "The framers believed that “high crimes and misdemeanors” included a president who used his foreign affairs powers for personal or political gain. " It's clear that this is the case with President Trump. Impeachment is the better course than leaving a president in place who has apparently committed other high crimes and misdemeanors including blatantly ignoring the Congress' sole power to allocate funds. As far as I'm concerned you have no credibility in this matter given that you were the White House counsel who championed the use of torture. Your reasoning and logic were flawed then, and is in this matter as well.
2
Consider this hypothetical. What if a President called the despot of another country and offered, in exchange for the exclusive right to build golf resorts in the despot’s country, our government would hunt down and murder dissidents of that country living here in the US? Is that impeachable? Or is it simply “foreign policy”?
I would like to meet this guy face to face. I am really curious how a person of this intellectual make up can be a tenured professor in one of the best universities in the world.
2
Oh please, just stop it. Democrats are following the letter and spirit of the Constitution. Donald's the one damaging the presidency and so are his top collaborators, Mulvaney, Pompeo and Barr. The Republican Senate will not convict, but the evidence needs to be presented to Congress and the American people to guide their choice in 2020.
I am truly wondered now or even bewildered.
When Nixon said or claimed or even stated : IF president does , it cannot be illegal.
Hold on.
What is the base for this argument , Honestly, In a democracy you cannot come up with this idea. This is medieval inquisition doctrine, infallible pope ….
Then, where Nixon find a support to this idea and even get delusional and believed so much … even that carried with a couple of Henchmen ( Cheney-Rumsfeld) to Bush Presidency) and Now Trump is literally worshipping this idea.
If president does , it cannot be wrong or illegal.
Such an idea in a democracy is legitimate????
All I can say is that Koch kicked the bucket exactly at the right time. The end of GOP is near. There will be justice after all.
When Yoo writes you know the end is near.
John Yoo believes that after he gave his approval as a lawyer to the United States's "extraordinary rendition" program, that he has any credibility left?
Not with me he doesn't.
2
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security."
Is that a joke? Our current president has demonstrated that his personal ethics and moral compass are essentially non-existent.
His is the epitome of a corrupted soul.
I can't think of a greater national security threat than a White House with this coward at the helm.
1
Apparently we can’t assume that every President is acting in the best interest of the nation, or the world.
The irony of a Republican lecturing on us on the perils of impeaching a president is rich indeed. If a president can be impeached over consensual sex with an adult then a president can be impeached for attempted bribery of a foreign leader to get that leader to help him defeat a political rival.
2
Impeaching Trump might hurt the presidency, but at least it wouldn't torture it.
5
Letting The Don get away with crime after crime does not do much to help the Presidency, either. Donald Trump is a professional criminal. His best friends are mobsters, he talks like a mobster, and he conducts himself like a mobster. This time, they caught him playing with the house money in a way that is not allowed - big money, $250,000,000 not a couple of bottles of Trump Vodka ----- throwing around $250,000,000 of Uncle Sam's money, in exchange for espionage on the opposing political party to personally benefit The Don, or should we say - to benefit Don and the Trumplings, his little entourage of misfit, crooked children who hover nearby as rats to an over-filled dumpster.. The question is not only should The Don be impeached for this, the question is also should be be put in prison. That fact that Joe Biden had some kind of sleazy dealings in the same country a few years back is really not relevant to the issue with Trump today. For whatever reason, the decision was made not to prosecute Biden at that time. That was then. This is now. The Don should be impeached, and imprisoned - for a good number of years.
1
It's not "foreign policy" when a president uses the people's money in an effort to extort a foreign government for his own personal enrichment, Mr. Yoo.
1
Donald J. Trump has hurt the presidency of the United States. Impeachment of this president might just save the presidency of the United States.
1
Given this guy’s record in the Bush administration his credibility is zero. I cannot believe anyone would hire or publish him. He and most of that administration should be publicly mocked and shamed at every opportunity.
2
Not having an impeachment inquiry will hurt the Presidency more.
1
The President hurt the Presidency.
2
Trump has hurt the presidency. He has hurt this country. He has, with the blessing of the GOP, gotten away with lying, courting dictators when he shouldn't, denigrating any person who disagrees with him, and acting as unpresidential as possible. He has nominated completely incompetent people to important cabinet positions, undermined people he's appointed, shut down the government for no reason, etc.
Impeaching him might be the best thing that could happen at this point. Of course I wouldn't expect a man who wrote a memo saying it was okay to torture enemy combatants to understand that concept. The presidency is not a dictatorship. The GOP was eager to block Obama, who was a far better president than Trump, for using executive orders to accomplish some of his worthwhile goals. They were equally eager to deny him the ability to do his job when Scalia died on the grounds that he had only one year left in office. Would they have done the same to Bush? No.
In truth, the entire GOP should be impeached. They have crossed the line from being a party to being a rabble. They have hurt this country, the presidency, and made it impossible for us to trust anything they say or do. They have acted for themselves alone. They are not public servants. They are sycophants.
9/24/2019 7:38pm first submit
3
Uh there is a difference between a President conducting foreign policy and demanding that a foreign government investigate an American citizen who also happens to be a political opponent.
7
Mr Yoo's advice and decisions while serving in justice under GWB, started the slide down this slippery slope of heightened secrecy, less transparency, and less regard for the traditional boundaries of the executive.
THAT is his legacy.
81
OK - Full disclosure - I went to law school in the evening - but even at that late hour, we learned that the fundamental principle that governs our beloved country is that no one is above the law. The power of the house to investigate and vote articles of impeachment is an expression of this principle. Professor You's 'creative' alternative to avoid damaging the power of the executive to conduct foreign policy - supported with cherry picked citations - speaks to his well known devotion to an unfettered executive and not to the supposed danger he seek to avoid.
44
Mr. Yoo's argument rests on the premise that if this phone call (or series of calls) is termed an 'intelligence activity', then a pandora's box of whistleblowing is irrevocably opened, and all future presidents will conduct foreign policy by passing post-its to other heads of state and then immediately eating said post-its lest legions of unscrupulous whistles blow. Well, sure... I guess that's possible, though it seems unlikely. Perhaps Congress may not be as inclined to open impeachment inquiries for less flagrant abuses of power. "But who decides what constitutes an abuse of power?" Mr. Yoo might say. Well, uh, Congress - selected by the same American people Mr. Yoo and the framers held in such high regard (real regard debatable on both counts). So regardless (ha) of where you fall on the spectrum, and despite the formality of the founding documents Mr. Yoo references, all government is an exercise in judgment. As judged by Mr. Yoo, we should live in a society that vests essentially absolute power in a single individual for a period of four years. As judged by others, maybe it would be better if didn't elect a tyrant. I think it was Francis Fukuyama who wrote that modern states only form after transitioning from rule BY law to rule OF law. Mr. Yoo - and yes, the president - both seem to think the US still adheres to the former. I hope that a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, demands the latter.
7
"Only with Ronald Reagan’s restoration of executive power could the United States carry out the strategy that ultimately won the Cold War."
Yes, and only with Reagan's restoration of executive power could the United States play loose with the rules and get us into Iran-Contra. I've always been skeptical of his claim that he didn't know about it [though he played the part of an executive who manned up, as he accepted responsibility because it was "on his watch."]
I agree it's a very tricky role to play, being the one man holding executive power. Roosevelt did it well throughout WWII, dealing with Churchill and Stalin. Kennedy did it well in the Cuban missile standoff. You can't do those things by committee or by Congress getting directly into it. But still, Congress has to have some role to play or a president can go far off the rails.
Humans are certainly an oddly fascinating species.
6
There is trade off between the freedom of a President to act with other Nations and the oversight of Congress.
The Constitution wisely Congress in charge of the budget and fiscal matters and the President in charge of foreign policy.
Congress does have the power to influence foreign policy through its budget power. But inherently disunited in opposite camps, Congress is not a suitable agent to deal with foreign leaders such as Putin and Xi, that act without constitutional constraints.
No friend of Trump, but for Congress to handle a President conduct of foreign affairs is not in the best interest of this Nation
The last time it happened, was, to cite the Economist
"In august 2013 a devastating chemical-weapons attack on the Damascus suburbs killed some 1,400 people. Faced with a clear breach of the red line he drew a year earlier, President Barack Obama had to decide what to do. He blinked. Rather than ordering reprisals against the regime of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, he opted to ask for Congress’s permission first. And Congress, it turned out, was not keen."
The result : Putin now controls Syria.
2
The Constitution established a system of checks and balances, so that the branches of government would be co-equal. President Trump has effectively ignored the House (since it now has a Democratic majority) and thanks to Mitch McConnell established a Republican Supreme Court. He has arguably violated the Emoluments Clause and obstructed justice. The only way to demonstrate that President Trump is acting as if the Constitution is irrelevant is for the House to begin impeachment proceedings.
2
While John Yoo has done a nice job of cherry-picking legal precedents for his case, in the real world the president is not the sole practitioner of American foreign policy. He may head that practice but he is advised and guided by an army of advisors and multiple organizations within the federal government. Under Prof. Yoo's theory-based logic, there would be no back-channel communications and low-level talks between our government and other governments--all discussions with other nations would flow through the president.
Further, in the real world the president's conversations with other leaders are monitored and recorded by the US government. It's a bit late in the game for Yoo to warn against a possible erosion of privacy for presidential talks.
Yoo apparently doesn't think that it's possible did commit "high crimes and misdemeanors" in dealing with Ukraine. Congress is actually moving towards investigating Trump but Yoo fails to discuss whether the known facts merit such a step. And we are a long ways away from Congress meddling too much in foreign policy.
Trump's pressuring of Zelensky to investigate Biden is not a practice of foreign policy. This is not about Trump fighting Ukrainian corruption: he zeroed in on Biden. Trump did so to boost his re-election chances.
Yoo should read his own NYT op-piece from Feb. 6, 2017 that warned against Trump and "Executive Power Run Amok" to touch base again with reality.
5
my concern is that the president can make the case that he can withhold the whistleblower report from congress as the law is sufficiently narrow in scope to apply only to those serving in the intelligence community, not the executive branch that oversees the intelligence community. Congress may be more effective dislodging the report by withholding military, intelligence and diplomatic funding, as Woo says. Othwerwise, if all we have is Trump withholding the the $400 million for Ukraine before he called their president about the corruption investigation, that may not convince the American people, let alone much of Congress or the Senate to vote for the article of impeachment. We have to get the whistleblower report. Bottom line.
It's a lovely counter-argument worthy of a lawyer, as long as you're willing to ignore the relative gravity of offenses and the effect they have already had on the nation, a constitutional version of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The same baseless assumption delayed this vital step for most of the year; impeachment might hamper Democratic 2020 candidates. All the while MORE harm ensues. No thanks. I voted to impeach AND I'll vote in 2020.
1
There is no doubt about the need for an impeachment inquiry. Without it the presidency--the office itself--will be severely hurt. With all due respect for Professor Yoo, his logic fails to reach the obvious.
1
Hurt the Presidency, as in weaken it? In light of recent history this might be a good thing. Allowing a President to rule by decree, or "executive order," can only create the erosion of our system, which is, or was, based on a balance of power and the existence of a free press. Let's get back to that.
2
I submit, Professor Yoo, that by choosing avoidance and appeasement over fulfillment of their oaths of office, the members of the House of Representatives would do a great deal more damage to the Constitution than they would by formally investigating the myriad evidence of malfeasance and corruption on the part of this president.
We need a new Limitations on Presidential Powers Act. We cannot allow future presidents of either party to commit treasonous acts against our own sovereignty. Presidents must submit nominees to consent of the Senate. No more acting advisors. Presidents must submit their tax returns for public scrutiny. Presidents must place all assets in a blind trust and may not profit from their position. And finally, sitting Presidents may be prosecuted for breaking the law.
3
Impeachment could not possibly do as much damage to the presidency as the lawless Donald Trump has already done. He has betrayed his country and is a threat to our national security. That supersedes any speculative notions that impeachment will harm the executive office. We survived the impeachment of Richard Nixon quite well, thank you. In fact, it bolstered confidence that our democratic system worked at a critical time when the process of impeachment was needed.
5
It's really pretty straightforward. If the president is guilty of "treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors" Congress shall impeach the president.
The arguments put forward by Mr John Yoo are certainly interesting, and informed, but are they relevant to this case? My Yoo does not address the actual behavior of Donald Trump. The president is authorized to conduct foreign affairs, this is undisputed. However, the president is not authorized to withhold military aid and to coerce a leader of a foreign nation to dig up dirt on the presidents political opponent.
Congress is not damaging the presidency, Donald Trump is damaging the presidency. Congress is trying to apply the rule of law and to protect and defend the constitution. Congress needs to see the full whistle-blower complaint, then decide whether or not the president committed an impeachable offense. If he has committed such offense, then it is their duty to impeach him.
Mr Yoo has articulated quotes from the founding fathers. He is obviously well versed in constitutional law. One question for Mr Yoo is, if a president commits "treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors" and Congress fails to act, are they carrying out their constitutional duty?
2
A president actively conducting important foreign policy and protecting our nation's security interests MIGHT be hindered in some way while nder an impeachment investigation (as was Nixon btw).
But this president's claim to fame has been creating his own crises one after another, coddling dictators, breaking faith with our long term allies, breaking faith with international commitments and accords. On the domestic security front, his claim is absurdly focused on building a midievil vanity wall, while ignoring actual real world threats, like election interference. And most of the time he's either lining his own pockets, playing golf or watching TV.
So, respectfully, if nothing else, the impeachment process might actually improve our government's performance in dealing with issues of critical importance, the main benefit is that Trump is pre-occupied and less able to create more messes!
2
I completely concur with Mr Yoo regarding the potential of permanent damage to the Office of the Presidency. It is a real risk. And so President Trump should do the honorable thing and resign, sparing the Country all this needless trauma.
3
' rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security.'
Rushing?! Really?
I say 'avoiding' impeachment will be what harms the presidency and the nation.
1
First of all, no one is asking for transcripts of his calls. Trump offered that. This was triggered when they tried to cover up the whistleblower complaint instead of giving to congress (confidentially) as the law requires,
Secondly, trump was not conducting foreign policy on this call. He was abusing his powers for personal means (and this isn’t the only instance)
Thirdly, you’re putting all the focus on a phone call and that’s trump’s narrative. We don’t actually know what that complaint is about because they’re covering it up. Could it be related to outing that Russian spy? Same time frame and trump made statement that he doesn’t think we should have spies. Sounds like a Putin talking point.
There are several impeachable offenses. Who can even keep up with them all. self dealing for one.
Just another republican towing the party line at all costs and one that condoned torture at that.
3
What a nice argument: Even if Trump did something illegal, the Nation's leaders should just trust the matter to the republican voters who can chalk any amount of criminal activity up to a plot or a conspiracy by the Democrats.
2
Telling a foreign leader to conjure up a bogus criminal investigation against your political rival is hardly "conducting foreign policy". It is extortion.
1
impeaching a self serving demagogue isn't going to hurt the presidency or the ability of an honest patriot to conduct foreign policy and protect the nation. donald trump is everything the founders feared and more.
1
So bringing up Hamilton & The Federalist is supposed to exonerate the current occupant of the Oval Office? Somehow I think that the parallels, the desire for power, control and $$$ - are better illustrated with Aaron Burr - or maybe George III. Cherry-pick all you want; it still doesn't ring true. Nice try though.
2
I'm sure this has been said already, but countries are already balking at going into treaties with America because of this administration. If we don't impeach him, he will do irreparable harm to the office of the President, if he had not already done so.
I believe Trump daily damages the long term ability of us presidents to manage foreign affairs. He has single handedly destroyed the credibility needed.
1
This writer wants us to wring our hands over a hypothetical consideration that may or may not occur in the future. But the crisis is here and now, and every day this goes on is damaging to our nation. Trump was elected with help from a foreign adversary, tells preposterous lies on a daily basis, throws fuel on the fires of hatred and intolerance, thinks caging children in squalid conditions is okay, um, let's see, what did I leave out? It's like our house is burning down but Yoo is worried that the firefighters' water will damage the carpets.
1
The framers never envisioned someone with as nefarious intent as that demonstrated by our current President. Nor did they predict a party that would support reckless disregard for American interests in the Congress.
Damage is already done - to the Oval Office, to the courts, to our Alliances, and to the Constitution. Remove the cancer ASAP. Think of Impeachment as chemo and the Election as surgery.
Perhaps it's just as well that future Presidents are more beholden to consensus and compromise. Why should a few, mostly white men, get to decide the fate of millions over unsupervised private conversations?
1
It's a strong argument except for the fact Trump was using taxpayer money to extort Ukraine into helping Trump's reelection campaign. Citizens wouldn't have a fair election if the President can use our own money to compel foreign governments to conjur up scandals against his election opponents. That's the key fact this otherwise well thought out opinion piece neglects.
Impeachment could harm the presidency? Worse than this president has hurt the presidency? And our country? Really?
3
The Thing in the White House has already damaged the presidency in heretofore unthinkable ways. Getting rid of It can only be an improvement.
1
If the framers didn't want presidents removed, they wouldn't have created impeachment. I don't remember Republicans worrying about weakening the presidency when they impeached Clinton
2
You know what else could hurt the Presidency?
Having executive branch goons telling the President that he can order torture of whoever he pleases and Congress can't stop him.
Arguing that the President can monitor US citizens on US soil without a warrant is another way we might harm the Presidency.
7
The hollowness of Mr. Yoo's argument, that the president's responsibility to carry out the nation's business is bigger and more important than any one president's alleged misdeeds, echoes like a giant empty gourd. It rests on the unspoken but by now totally discredited premise that Trump is willing or even able to place the nation's interests ahead of his own. Unitary executive power, such as Mr. Yoo would like, in the hands of a man by turns corrupt or incompetent, is autocracy. The unitary executive is an authoritarian ideal intolerable to our republic.
As for Mr. Yoo's proposed alternative to impeachment:
"A special congressional committee could review classified information in secret and bring United States and foreign officials to testify under oath. The House could meet any stonewalling by cutting intelligence, military and diplomatic funding."
... it is a sham proposal, and laughable to boot. I doubt Congress can withhold funds allocated in the current budget but even if it can, Trump has already demonstrated his willingness to redirect money as he pleases. He could relieve budgetary pressure on any agency or official in the crosshairs (at the expense of other public services, to be sure, but Trump doesn't care). That Mr. Yoo makes this argument is astonishing. He isn't stupid so I must assume he thinks the rest of us are.
2
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security." Rushing into?? Give me a break. This President has toyed with, and carried out high crimes and misdemeanors since he took office. The House has to own up to its responsibility under the constitution to call it what it is. Yes, the politics could go either way..but I personally would rather see us try to constrain the demise of our democracy, than, as exemplified by the republican cowards, worry most about party and re-election.
I can't believe the NYT gives this guy a voice. He is best known for his torture memos during W's Presidency and now he dishonestly suggests there is some sliver of a future problem with Presidential power in starting an Impeachment inquiry?
There are a dozen well documented reasons for at least an investigation to begin. I assume we will finally be able to address the continuous and evident violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution as well as the substantial case made by Mueller.
If Congress gets Trump's tax returns I suspect we will also find out he is getting financing for his business from Russian Oligarchs and Middle Eastern Sovereign Funds since most banks won't do business with him. That alone probably constitutes potential treason.
The Ukraine incident simply opens the door for the inquiry. Any Republican not supporting an investigation is equally culpable as it is impossible to compare the Trump accusations to the Clinton ones and not get a unanimous verdict from the Senate if anything is proven. Anything less is patent dishonesty by the GOP.
6
Doing nothing is even worse. Trump obstructed justice with the Mueller report, probably to hide his collusion with Putin to rig the 2016 election. Now he is digging up dirt on a political opponent with another foreign power, the Ukraine. These are far more serious charges than the Watergate affair.
Professor Yoo is obviously willing to allow an imperial presidency, the kind of presidency that is currently harming most of the people of China.
Most citizens, however, having read the Constitution and experienced the side-effects of this self-serving administration, don’t agree. People are being harmed (workers, farmers, children, the elderly) and the environment is being harmed, our allies are being abused, our troops are being sent to defend the wealthiest and most abusive nation in the Middle East. This President is an abusive would-be tyrant and richly deserves impeachment.
You reference how impeachment could hurt the presidency. He's systematically trying to destroy the constituation and everything the United States stands for.
I'll take a hurt presidency over the damage he continues to do.
If we don't have a democracy left, there won't be a president to hurt!
Mr Yoo is so wrong. It begs to wonder how a lawyer can possibly come up with this explanation. A President cannot be allowed to do whatever he wishes, when what he wishes may actually endanger our great Nation. A President is not a King or a dictator. I am fully tired of the faux nationalist that twist our laws and Constitution to fit their crimes. Mr. Yoo is in the wrong country, if he in fact believes any of this pablum he is spilling. Congress needs to strengthen our laws to insure interpretations such as this are no longer possible.
I guess Democrats who want a future democratic president to collude with foreign powers to knee cap political opponents should take a moment and think about if they really limit presidential power in this way. Jeez!
Recommend Professor Yoo take a historical look at the impeachment process.
"We must avoid doing long-term harm to the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation." I think it's too late for that. The long-term harm to the presidency was done when Trump tried to bribe and extort the Ukrainian president.
A majority of the American people look forward to completely dimantling the imperial presidency. This includes taking the power to wage war from the president and placing it back into the hands of Congresss. The use of phoney emergencies to do whatever must also end. And on Day 1 of a Democrat in office every one of the Excutive Orders and Agency regulations of this regime must be undone.
NOT impeaching Trump would do more damage to the presidency. We don’t want these guys thinking naked corruption is a good campaigning gun strategy. That would poison our democracy beyond its capacity to survive.
We can’t allow this kind of thing. I’d say the same if he was a Democrat.
1
Mr. Yoo,
What the President was doing was not conducting foreign policy. He was using already congress-approved funds as a bargaining chip to extort negative information from a foreign government about his political adversary. That's not conducting foreign policy. That's trying to enrich himself at this nation's expense. You see, it's all about him. It's always about him. What I don't understand is not only how he could be so blatantly stupid but how any republican can shrug it off.
1
"No one is above the law." Pelosi. She had to take a stand or be complicit. Trump left Pelosi no room.
1
So, are you suggesting that we should reach for impeachment only in the face of serious political fire?
No problem. Trump's presidency is an inferno!
Good. The presidency has gotten too big for any one person regardless of capability or qualification. The Presidency needs to be taken down a peg.
One wonders constantly at the bizarre logic of those who would support this man. Here, it is on parade.
The Art of Utterly Corrupt Deals: In your face obstruction of justice & extortion is still obstruction & extortion. What won’t Trump & his grifters do or say to get Mr. Emoluments re-elected? Cornered and desperate Trump & his gang will… bring out Giuliani to exclaim: "Of course I did!" & John Yoo to warn us against accountability for criminal of the President. Three cheers for Pelosi & accountability!
An editorial from John Yoo defending another ill-elected president yet again, seriously? After all thats been written of him as the supercharging enabler of the Bush power abuses and quagmires and missteps that live with us still? Seriously? The real estate in these columns I suggest needs to be more carefully let out.
3
Has Yoo been sleeping the past two and half years that he does not realized the presidency has been under the water day by day since trump "took over" the country?
"It could harm the presidency." That ship has sailed.
2
Nothing imperils the presidency more than Trump’s abuse of power. Left unchecked, we will no longer have a presidency, we will have a dictator.
"The House could meet any stonewalling by cutting intelligence, military and diplomatic funding." To quote one the leading Democratic candidates to challenge Trump for the Oval Office: "Malarkey". As a practical matter, the budgets of these agencies are already appropriated and, in any event, the Senate would have to agree to any cuts or holds and that is as likely as the sun not rising in the East tomorrow. Mr. Trump has shifted funds appropriated for military construction and aid to Puerto Rico to fund his stupid wall. He ignores the intelligence community and has gutted the State Department of career diplomats, not to mention other egregious examples of his his usurping of Congressional authority such as withholding funds from the Ukraine.
"Mr. Trump will also have his opportunity to provide a transcript of the call and to make the case that his official acts remained uninfluenced by any ulterior political motives" Lest we forget, Nixon submitted transcripts of his Oval Office tapes which turned out to have been altered once the actual tapes were turned over. Maybe that is why it is taking so long to even get the transcripts. Barr is probably busy scrubbing them.
The Clinton impeachment was a political attempt to a coupe based on a sting operation over a sex act that in an of itself was not illegal. Nixon committed one crime and was impeach; trump has committed dozens of impeachable offenses. This president is more dangerous to the US than any enemy the country has. He deserves impeachment way more than he deserved installation in a tainted election.
What about the harm trump has done to our democracy? I for one am sick to death of an imperial presidency be it dem or repub.
I am daily exasperated and embarrassed by Trump's actions and words. However, I've never supported impeachment proceedings against him. I say this because of obvious political calculations. Although lots of people assume Trump is foolish or stupid, in fact he is quite skilled at certain kinds of manipulation and dirty tricks. In addition, the road to impeachment is guaranteed to not be as smooth as my fellow angry Democrats believe. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm confident that as we head down the impeachment route, it will be messy, Democrats will gain some voters but lose many others, and Trump will solidify his base. I feel it would be far more effective if Democrats could organize a clear narrative about Trump's conduct, and repeat it constantly until the 2020 election.
1
Mr Yoo - keep typing, no one has ever failed to make a handsome living as an apologist for the status quo, especially by polishing it's ugliest elements to a shine. I don't believe you really think the founding fathers didn't create impeachment exactly for a President like Trump, but I think there's going to be another round of rats jumping off a certain ship of state pretty soon and they'll be needing replacements. Get the CV ready, this is round four of restaffing so they're pretty much looking for anyone who says a kind word however sideways it might be..
4
This wacky scenario of the inmates running the asylum, as the Democrats cower to its Socialist wing, is exactly what the Constitution’s framers envisioned in their thoughtful writing. They are pursuing impeachment as the last effort to get Trump out, knowing full well that the lunatics running (with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard) have ZERO chance of winning the election. They better get ready for the boomerang about to hit them square in the face.
I overcame my reluctance to read anything by this author. The Times is very generous to publish his views. The burden of Trump's destruction of our government's ability to function internally and in foreign affairs makes the news... and Americans' lives suffer. Need I mention character? Blind obeisance to this cardboard character is only understood as a modern day Custer's Last Stand. Republicans will not survive for long; I'm counting on the arc of justice. Let's all keep working. National arrogance? I've had enough. Selling arms to Saudi Arabia to kill innocent Yemenis? I've had enough. Blind warmongering? Please tell me a country that wanted us to invade? Iraq? I've had enough of our intrusion into the politics of countries whose leaders our military leaders want to replace. I want an America to respect again, despite our grave mistakes through the years.
Careless Voters! Time to learn what is going on. Time to act -VOTE.
No, John, the foreign powers of the president are already far too vast, thanks in part to ideologues such as yourself who helped make it that way during the Bush years.
It's time to put Trump on a leash.
1
Respectfully Sir - “rushing in?” Trunp’s egregious behavior began when he asked the Russians to find Clinton's emails.
He is incompetent, corrupt, and lacks the basic intelligence, compassion, and judgement to be POTUS. He has demonstrated this daily.
How much longer do we wait??
Joo is right if mr. president didn’t do this kind of trick so many times.
This is a terrible take.
This assumes the president is above the law and that checks and balances against this one president will damage future presidents and ignores the fact that Trump has run roughshod over all the precedent and rules that have governed the presidency since Day 1. It is PRECISELY because of him that new rules will have to be written to reign in presidential misconduct and prevent a recurrence of this criminal. He has ruined the office of the presidency and only his removal will allow the tattered remnants to be repaired.
It's quite likely that even if impeached, the Senate will not convict, but if you fear doing something because you think the other side will win, then the other side has already won. Don't give in that easily. Let him spend all next year fighting the impeachment issue and not have such an easy ride to the election. We need to use every tool possible to stop his juggernaut of criminality and repugnant behavior.
It's way past time to start impeachment.
2
Trump has already done incalculable damage to office of the President of the United States. He is a blot on the prestige of our country and lasting damage to our democratic institutions. Impeachment and imprisonment are need bring this nightmare to an end.
1
i am a democrat and i do not agree with this move.
Democrats and I am one of them are making a desperately wrong move in going for impeachment.
Democrats are lost.
Instead of getting a new fresh candidate we have just Biden who has no chance of beating Trump.
Its just bad
why cant democrats see the obvious?
so busy hating trump that democats cant think
1
Trump is doing more harm to the US just by being president. He is not above the law. He was bribing a foreign government, withholding money from them if they didn't do what he wanted, investigate a presidential candidate. This is treasonous and he should be impeached. Allowing him to proceed will do irreparable harm to the country. It is Congress's right to impeach a president. It's in the constitution!
What nonsense. Extorting a foreign government to get them to help harm legitimate political opposition is not hurting the executive's ability to conduct foreign policy. The part you seem to be deliberately overlooking is that Congress has oversight over the executive branch in order to protect against abuses of power. The Constitution was written to make absolutely certain that the president had checks on the awesome power that was bestowed upon that office. I think Yoo is caught in the weeds and has missed the big picture entirely.
1
Typical Pro-Trump behavior. Take your own worst fault, in this case harming the institution of The Presidency, and project it on others. Won't work. Prof. Yoo and Mr. Trump have both severely damaged The Presidency. Impeachment will restore it somewhat. It will take time and effort to repair the damage.
1
Well, he didn't disclose his tax returns. All this Ukraine business stinks of Russian influence. It would be good for the American people to know where this President's loyalty resides.
Enough. The President is already a dictator. This is not Russia or China or Brazil.
1
The presence of this piece in the NY Times has me scratching my head. It has no logic in it, as many of the comments already have noted. There is no depth of historic or political scientific scholarship about how our government works, how past egregious behavior was successfully or unsuccessfully treated, and how these events play out in their consequences for our democracy.
If the Times wants to "balance" its opinion page, it can surely publish solid conservative scholarship on this issue. Many readers don't appreciate being shown the depth of brutal stupidity of the faction that wishes to turn the presidency into a monarchy.
Maybe we should just start torturing Republicans until they promise they'll hold the most corrupt president in the nation's history accountable for his many crimes and offenses. Or would that be immoral?
What do you think, Mr. Yoo?
6
Does Professor Yoo believe in an elected dictatorship? If I were to go to law school, I would hardly want him to be teaching me about democracy and ethics in government!
4
"Sole responsibility...?" Trump has antagonized so many allies and conducted himself like a PR agency for himself. America's credibility is being systematically destroyed and its judgment on the most basic issues is becoming distorted in bizarre ways nobody would have thought possible.
Remember this, O "New Romans"... After Nero comes Caligula.
1
Impeaching Trump strengthens the nation, punishes corruption and divisiveness, and restores the rule of law. To not impeach Trump is irretrievably harmful to America.
2
John Yoo's views on the unitary executive are well known, and his legal opinions at the OSC written at the behest of Dick Cheney will go down in infamy.
6
But what if the President is mad?
What if he decides to sell all of our aircraft carriers to Brazil?
What if he thinks it might be useful to share the nuclear launch codes with Russia?
So... is there a limit to what we are willing to allow the Commander if Chief to do?
1
We must give John Yoo a great deal of credit because he has written one of the "funniest" columns that the NYTimes has published in quite some time. Like his life in NYC, Donald Trump's entire presidency has been a crime spree. I will quote former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti: "What Trump is alleged to have done is not a garden variety crime; it’s worse. It involved misusing $250 million in aid appropriated by Congress for his benefit—the kind of gross misconduct that easily clears the bar of high crimes and misdemeanors set by the Constitution when impeaching a president. Which means the best way to hold Trump accountable for that misconduct isn’t a criminal trial; it’s for Congress to impeach him."
5
Donald Trump has done more to hurt the presidency than any other president of all time. And yet Yoo, the waterboarding proponent from the Bush Administration, is worried that a little oversight will hurt the office of the presidency? Baloney!
This is a devious, dangerous article whose intent is to muddy the waters.
2
What could be worse than to leave an unnatural monster unchecked? What could be worse than to daily ignore the mounting abuses against the People and the Constitution of the United States of America?
Even mad Nero himself only fiddled while Rome burned. Trump actively shovels coal upon a burning world.
If this isn't the most egregious criminal act of any president in our history, I don't know what is. This is not foreign policy. What a debasement of the notion.
The whole argument of this flawed opinion is that the president was conducting foreign affairs on his call and we shouldn't impeach over it because in the future it'll harm a president's ability to conduct foreign affairs.
The mental gymnastics Trump apologists perform is pathetic. I wonder if it sounds perfectly logical as they're composing.
1
sure, right but at some point, other actors need to start thinking about whether they could be charged with misprision of treason.
We also need to save our Republic and its laws! Trump has violated his oath of office, conspired with a foreign government once again to influence our election and systematically deprived Congress of the exercise of its duty of oversight. There is no choice but to start Impeachment proceedings.
2
Since the Reagan Administration there has been a continuing and now accelerating evolution of the unitary executive. The use of Signing Statements and Executive Orders have clearly replaced bipartisan bicameral legislation arrived at through consensus between the Legislative and Executive branches of our government. While I fully agree that unitary leadership is essential in time of war, this most recent disclosure demonstrates wanton disregard his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. This President may be at war with morals, truth, and integrity; that is not a valid national security issue.
The Trump Administration has fraudulently used the argument of “National Security” to justify blatantly racist immigration policy and disregard for clearly written legislation regarding funding for a border wall. And now you argue that unitary authority justifies conduct that is clearly criminal if the whistle-blower complaint is shown to be a quid-pro-quo inviting foreign intervention in our elections. Sorry, Professor Yoo, I must disagree.
1
Mr. Yoo has long subscribed to the notion that whatever the president does is right and has made a career of using his recognized legal prowess to bolster and defend that dangerous idea.
Arthur Schlesigner wrote long ago about the ascendance of the imperial presidency, but despite Mr. Schlesinger's warmings and those of many others, congress has since often deferred to the president on many matters, decisions about war and national security primary among them. To the degree that congress has deferred, presidents have naturally rushed to fill the void.
Mr. Yoo thinks that's more than fine. As a Bush II functionary he supported the Iraq adventure, a war waged on false pretenses and one which the country and thousands of soldiers and their families continue to pay for and even crafted legal opinions excusing torture, he apparently learned nothing about presidential excess, and forgot all he learned in law school about the separation of powers or why the Constitution was so crafted.
Now we have a president who cares little for the Constitution. If Mr. Yoo wished to do a public service he would be tutoring Mr. Trump on that document's words and meaning, not encouraging him (and his party) to ignore it in the interests of what he chooses to call "national security."
Next thing you know Mr. Trump will declaring a national energency and robbing the defense of billions of dollars to build a wall on our southern borde--or somthing equally silly.
6
"Congress’s traditional oversight powers will force the intelligence agencies and the White House to provide the facts behind the Trump-Zelensky call and any delay in Ukrainian aid." Bless your heart,sir. Have you even been paying attention to what the White House has done in response to legitimate congressional oversight actions over the last nine months?
10
"But we should beware that rushing into an impeachment may do long-term harm to the presidency and our national security."
Guess we should've thought about that before we elected a conman to the the White House in the first place.
12
"It may hurt the presidency."
Considering the wrecking ball Trump has already taken to the presidency, removing him is the only way to begin healing the office.
11
Professor Yoo, you worked for President George W. Bush. He should have been impeached for lying us into two wars. Is this why you’re defending Donald Trump? How much worse can a president be?
27
Really?? Conflating Trump's attempts at extortion with foreign policy? These are arguments that middle schoolers can easily see through. Trump apologists, do you have no shame?
11
Rush to impeach? I don't think we have "rushed" to impeach...
11
What?!
In a normal world the thesis would be true. However, we entered the twilight zone a looooooong time ago
2
Nice omission from his bio. I mean it's not like he wrote one of the most controversial briefs that damaged the global standing of the United States. I don't care if you publish views that are different from mine; I do care that you publish the work of a partisan hack whose take on Presidential power has already proven disastrous.
13
Leadership under the entire Republican Party has already done the United States of America profound, long-term harm. Trump is just a symptom of a malignant, rightwing disease. This won't end even if Trump is impeached.
1
I haven't even read this piece but the preposterousness of the very thesis rankles ("Beware...it could hurt the presidency")---as if anything could possibly wreak more damage upon the presidency than the current abomination holding the office.
3
Hate to remind his professorship that Donald Trump already hurt the presidency.
2
It is difficult to determine where to begin. Mr Yoo asserts that the framers trusted the American people to address Presidential abuses.
The same framers excluded the following from American people:
1. Savages.
2. Women.
3. Enslaved People.
The Supreme Court has made it clear that an individual does not have the right to vote for President.
Mr. Yoo, bless your heart, in the sense of Southern.
4
For a law professor I'm surprised you left out a significant point about the law. A whistle blower's report that is supposed to go to Congress within one week of being filed, has been stopped by the White House and Justice Department. Until that obstruction of justice is remedied you really don't have much of an argument. Do you?
9
The only Presidency I can imagine impeaching Trump could harm is Vladimir Putin's.
2
Wait, we are being told not to challenge executive power by John Yoo?
*That* John Yoo?
So next we can expect an opinion piece by OJ Simpson denouncing restraining orders.
13
John Woo, the guy who gave Bush the supposed legal basis for torture and greatly expanded presidential powers bringing us closer to a dictatorship talks about damaging the presidency.
What a joke.
14
So you're saying we should support "...the president's ability to conduct foreign policy and protect our nation" - like supporting foreign dictators like Kim Jong-Un and Bolsonaro? or protecting our nation by letting climate-deniers take over the EPA, and keeping immigrant children in cages??
What we are not supporting is this dishonest and corrupt man who has done tremendous harm to our nation and to our standing in the world~ he has severely damaged the very core of its integrity. The list of damages is too long to write!
It is in fact, Time To Impeach.
1
Trump has done great damage to the Presidency with his reckless actions, his demeaning speech, his horrid treatment of our allies, and his dangerous tread into treasonous territory. A President cannot just do whatever he pleases, he is there to serve the country, not himself. He has crossed too many red lines that we the people need to put back in place for the sake of a democracy that we treasure. We did not elect a king, nor are we interested in an autocrat. We must reign in this dangerous man.
2
why does this remind me of Shakespeare's "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose"?
5
I'm sorry, but the Framers could not have conjured so vile a president as Trump, which renders your lofty analysis misplaced.
2
Your concerns fall short of the real damage that's been done and continues by this incompetent president and administration. Protections of the Presidency or any of the branches of government are designed for a normal functioning presidency not a corrupt individual. The Presidency is not above the law and is supposed to be one of the branches of government not the main one. They are supposed to keep each other in check - this has passed long ago.
Please take your blinders off. Your concern is unwarranted and misplaced.
Where is your concern for the institutions under attack by Trump.
1
Oh please really? Donald’s unethical & criminal character has irrevocably exposed the fallacy of checks & balances of the presidency & executive branch.
Yoo’s argument is your typical GOP enabling mantra.
He has made a mockery of our presidency since day one & has scared GOP legislators to be complicit.
1
History tells me that anything Yoo supports is to be examined carefully, and often doubted, discounted, and discarded.
4
Trump belongs in prison for the rest of his natural life. To the contrary of your opinion, I believe impeachment is quite good for our Country’s well being. Corruption must be excised from our federal, state, and local governments. We have been down this road way to long. Greed and enrichment must be forbidden, totally.
1
You're absolutely wrong. We must uphold the tenants of our Constitution. We have nothing else to depend on but our laws. All must agree to keep the laws. Having a president who flouts the laws has already damaged the presidency beyond measure. We must call upon the principles and standards of our country in order to get us out of this horrible situation. Life works for all when we all keep the rules. We just need to do the right thing and stay that course. And the right thing is to oust a flagrant, treasonous lawbreaker who, right now, is leading this country down the tubes. Get rid of him and clean the wounds he has inflicted after he is purged.
1
Damaged the Presidency.??
He already has.
He earned the disgrace of being impeach.
He keeps on pushing and pushing the limits of what is lawful and decent.
I am against impeachment.
I have always believe, that impeachment is a very traumatic event. It is the last resort.
Let, the Presidential election of 2020, pass judgment on Trump.
Mueller's report convinced me that impeachment is not the way.
That, the election of 2020, is the correct Constitutional way to see if the country agrees with Trump.
But, when this issue with, Ukraine, surfaced, I realized that this president, is not simply some loud mouthed, amoral, incompetent buffoon.
He is, now a threat to our, Constitution.
To blatantly asked a foreign leader to gather evidence against a political opponent running against you, is illegal and wrong.
Trump, sword an oath to uphold and defend, the Constitution.
He must be impeached.
My conscience, and belief, as an American, after reading the facts, convinced me, that, our current, President, must be impeached.
2
LOL! This is really rich! Does John Yoo, a well-known Republican lap dog who will adopt any constitutional position that benefits the Republican position, really believe that he can convince people that he is a pillar of impartiality? The party that impeached Bill Clinton for lying about an affair with an intern after a partisan investigation that spanned four years wants people to hold off on a guy who lies to the American people multiple times each day? Really, if it weren't so pathetic it would be laughable.
12
Hasn’t trump already damaged the presidency and national security enough by consorting with Russians and hacking up our government? He is president line-my-pockets. Does any one believe he cares about his country over his ego and bank account? What a ridiculous argument against impeachment. It’s as if someone made him write this essay as assignment for a class in being contrary. I can’t begin to see any salient points.
2
This is rich, the guy who diminished our standing in the world by sanctioning torture now frets over the “damage” that impeachment of a criminal and treasonous president would inflict on the office? Who’s he kidding? And then has the nerve to admonish that impeachment should be reserved only as a last resort? News flash, Mr. Yoo, this is our last resort. For more than 2 years now we have watched Individual-1 trash our laws, our norms and the Constitution itself on almost a daily basis. Throw in a little treason now and then, and it’s hard to imagine how the presidency, and the country, could take much more of this guy.
11
I have zero interest in protecting a president when he calls up a foreign power to do his re-election dirty work. Nope. Nor do I want presidents emboldened to target their political foes in such corrupt fashion. How would John Yoo feel if a Democratic president got China or Israel to dig up dirt on him?
Frankly, I'm amazed at how naive Yoo is. He trusts this president to be gravely "conducting foreign relations" when it's obvious to pretty much everyone else that this president has no foreign policy whatsoever. He's got nothing to discuss on the phone with Ukraine or any other country. Except what they can do to help him cheat his way to re-election, of course.
2
The framers proceeded from the basic assumption that the president would execute foreign policy in the interest of the nation, and they noted the appropriate charges and procedures that could be taken up to safeguard that nation in the event that he did not.
Your argument may have had some merit early in the nation's history when the great world powers were still ruled by kings and none were very sure what power the word of a "president" would carry, with either other nations or among his own people. But the U.S. president's power and trust in the world today is well established by two centuries of law and history and is unlikely to receed over an event such as this.
The threat to the presidency today is of an entirely different character. And impeaching Donald Trump may just save it.
11
Mr Yoo has chosen to ignore how rapidly malfeasance in the Office of the President can impact the Republic and its citizens. Too much power has been bestowed upon the Office of the President by previous Congressional actions; and there needs to be a curtailment of unilateral executive actions and a return to a balance of power. It may even be too late to save our Republic from autocratic rule. I fear the implementation of martial law in your four year review process. Preserving the Republic trumps 'hurting the Presidency.'
4
Mr Yoo's past record of Presidential apologia, which includes the memo that rationalized the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and to which we can now add this opinion, would appear to put him in the camp of those who believe in an Imperial Presidency (likely only for Republicans). I am not a member of that camp, and I don't believe the Framers were either.
14
A president asking a foreign leader to get involved in a US election is neither "conducting foreign policy" nor acting on the president's "responsibility to protect the nation’s security."
On the contrary, it is the conduct of "personal policy" and an action "to harm the nation's security."
7
Given Mr Yoo’s varicose position on justifying torture for a previous Republican administration, it is not surprising to see his moral and ethical flexibility applied to this President.
I am impressed by his concern about his Republican President, he points to great men in our history- if only our current White House occupant was a small fraction of the men he cited, then his position might be relevant.
As a lifelong Republican, I find that 45 represents a nadir in the party’s history, having lost all claim to the key, fundamental issues in service of their political careers and the donor class. Too many say “yeh but what about” the other guys instead of being leaders, they are whiners and self-proclaimed victims.
Where are the great women and men in the Republican Party? It is time for a change to electing leaders, not more whiners.
12
"Democrats may regret again wounding the presidency when Mr. Trump’s successors grapple with the rise of China as a global power, Russia’s revanchism, Iran’s quest for regional hegemony and North Korea’s nuclear proliferation."
Thanks for the concern, Mr Yoo, but I am pretty sure the next Democratic president will be able to deal with these issues without having to resort to extortion.
PS: "national security" is the last refuge of a POTUS with something to hide.
7
Professor Yoo, as you well know, "impeachment" is basically an indictment -- a determination that there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. No conscientious prosecutor would present a case to a grand jury without having undertaken some investigation into the facts. Yet whenever Congress tries to investigate those facts, Trump claims immunity or privilege of one sort or another. At some point, Congress must exercise the only remedy provided by the Constitution, namely, to conduct an investigation that might or might not lead to impeachment. Otherwise, it is simply conceding that, as Trump has loudly proclaimed, "Article II means I can do whatever I want."
6
“A president, even one who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing, must have confidence in the confidentiality of his communications or he will be unable to perform his constitutional duties and our international relations will fall victim to government by committee.”
We, the people, must have confidence that no one in the United States, even a president, is above the law. Engaging in wrongdoing is simply incompatible with the constitutional duties the author says a president must perform. To serve in the Oval Office is a trust given, not an entry into a hermetically sealed secret land where whatever the current occupant, a public servant, says or does is forever kept apart. Some conversations may need to be protected, yes; those that evidence potential illegal activity cannot be among them. We have to know the person whose actions represent this nation does so in accord with the law of this nation. If not, the occupant forfeits the privilege of serving this country.
6
If the president is misusing the powers of the executive branch to affect voting and congress does nothing, then our democracy will fall apart because congress is not doing the job of oversight like the framers intended, and that is a much worse outcome than limiting diplomatic powers by investigating potential misuse.
5
"A president, even one who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing, must have confidence in the confidentiality of his communications." It is surreal to read this assertion from a legal professor. But perhaps less so from one who authored memoranda justifying torture.
10
Clearly, impeachment and presidential authority over foreign policy is fragile territory on which congress must tread with great care. However, I find your analysis and blind trust in the executive stunningly off base. First, what trump has done concerns domestic policy - ie our elections and getting another country to interfere with them - not foreign policy.
Second, game theory teaches that without a credible threat of impeachment, a president would have even more incentive to increasingly entrench him/herself through whatever means necessary. This is precisely how autocracies start. Take a peek at Venezuela, Russia, Hungary and others just in the last 20 years for quick proof...They started as largely democracies, only to watch their leaders gradually seize all levers of power with impunity.
Impeachment is included in the constitution for such a reason, and I find it impossible to believe the framers didn’t have this in mind for a president who so blatantly abuses his power.
1
So many "wha??" moments while reading. Rushing into impeachment?? This was a long time coming, if anyone believes Trump is acting in the best interests of the American people - they are delusional. He's in it for himself, period. There are so many instances where you can say unequivocally "that's Un-American". It's embarrassing honestly and unfair to millions of people who came to this country with the best of intentions, to better themselves. There is no brighter future with Trump. Forget hurting the presidency, this is hurting America and has been for a while.
5
Mr. Yoo states at the top of his argument that the President has already agreed to release the transcript of the call that is at the center of the whistleblower complaint against him. But how do we know if that is the only or even the primary wrongdoing that the whistleblower is trying to report if the administration illegally withholds the complaint? Very convenient to release the transcript whole withholding the complaint. Mr Yoo’s argument falls apart there.
2
What slick sleight of hand using the Constitution to buttress a modern conception of the executive branch. We've gone so far away from having Congress share power with a President in foreign affairs, as the Constitution so carefully set forth, and yet John Yoo argues for even less accountability and more executive power with his unitary model. Such irony that the Founding Fathers led a revolution against that very notion.
Remember Mr. Yoo, there was congressional and public outrage over Jay's Treaty and Washington was nearly unseated over it.
Remember Mr. Yoo, one of Wilson's 14 Points was to end the practice of secret treaties (transparency was modern!).
Anyone can cherry pick history to make an argument, but it only works with folks who don't know their history.
Remember Mr. Yoo, there was a reason that Congress, not the President, earned the first Article of the Constitution--it was the most important branch to the Founding Fathers. They would be aghast at the powers of the presidency today, and wonder at your bizarre interpretation of reality.
2
Could impeaching Trump hurt the Constitutional office of president? I for one sincerely hope so.
So what if the "framers" created a strong presidency? They were not gods. They could not foresee the future, and some of them admitted as much. The creation of a strong presidency wasn't some brilliant long term plan, but based on confidence in the ethics and integrity of the man who all knew would be the first one: George Washington. Prof. Yoo might speculate instead on whether the framers would have created such a strong office had they known the character of the man who would one day occupy it.
Further, as T. Jefferson among others was well aware, the unknowable future would certainly bring such changed circumstances as to require amending the Constitution; therefore, the framers provided for that. Having been its authors, the framers themselves did not hold it in the regard we do today.
The best lesson to take from Trump is his providing us a road map for how we should Constitutionally restrict presidential power. The office is today far too powerful, near monarchical, as Yoo himself has advocated it to be. So we shouldn't listen to anything he has to say on this subject.
Both parties are complicit in this mess. Even many Democrats seem to think that all we need is a "good" president. Too many regard the president as a quasi-monarch. If Trump degrades the office, that could end up the best thing he did as president ... if we take that as a cue to amend the Constitution.
1
Who is rushing to impeachment? Trump’s behavior begs for impeachment. All we get by delaying is more impeachable offenses. The risks of delayed impeachment pose greater harm to our country than any risk of harm to the presidency by opening the impeachment inquiry at this time.
3
If it's true that President Trump was pressuring Ukraine to investigate the Bidens or gain information helpful to his reelection, then he was not conducting foreign policy -- Professor Yoo's main argument -- but was attempting to gain foreign influence in an American election.
3
Donald J Trump has harmed and is harming the presidency on a continuous basis.
The best way to stop the ongoing harm being done to the presidency is to impeach and remove Donald J Trump from office, the sooner the better.
When historians conduct a post mortem of Trump's presidency, they will say that some of the damage done by Trump to the presidency will take decades to repair, and that some of the damage done is permanent.
Congress cannot move quickly enough to impeach and remove Trump from office.
Failure to remove Trump from office will further damage the presidency and America at large permanently.
1
The headline of this article is weirdly correct.
In a word, Pence.
In more words, the Rs have plenty of time to paint Pence as "the gentlemanly conservative and good Christian man," which an amazing number of Americans would swallow whole. He could serve out Trump's term, win in 2020 and be the incumbent in 2024. See the 22nd Amendment.
Pardon the irony, but God help the human race and all other sentient beings.
4
The authors points are all valid and important. But they all assume that power is being held by a person acting in good faith.
The inquiries and eventual articles of impeachment will show that this person is not.
1
" Democrats may regret again wounding the presidency when Mr. Trump’s successors grapple with the rise of China as a global power, Russia’s revanchism, Iran’s quest for regional hegemony and North Korea’s nuclear proliferation."
Sir (Yoo), your prose is gibberish. The sitting President has already "wounded"/damaged the position far greater than a law abiding member of another political party could ever do. This country was better before him and will be better after him.
2
All the high mindedness is blinding people to the obvious. I am not saying the Constitution of the United States is obsolete. What I am saying is that the founding fathers did not or could not imagine a time when weapons of mass destruction are under control of powerful countries. Considering the world as it is ——- do we want a President to hold private conversations with World leaders without witnesses, . . . while in office? Do we want the commander in chief to hide his conversations from Congress and intelligence agencies?
1
Yoo seems to ignore the fact that if the President uses the office not for the purposes of serving the interests of the country but for his/her own, he/she is violating the oath of office and is acting without any valid authority.
1
Sometimes, Mr. Yoo, it becomes necessary to destroy an out-of-control presidency in order to save it.
2
Freezing Congressionally-voted aid to Ukraine is not the normal exercise of presidential power to conduct foreign policy.
1
"Democrats may regret again wounding the presidency when Mr. Trump’s successors grapple with the rise of China as a global power, Russia’s revanchism, Iran’s quest for regional hegemony and North Korea’s nuclear proliferation"
Except the current President is best buds with Putin, he's negotiating with mad murderous leader of North Korea,he and cancelled the nuclear agreement with Iran, and undid all the progress that Obama made.. The way I see it impeaching Trump will help resolve all these issues (except for the rise of Chin, but I don't see why the rise of a trading partner will be a problem ) so it's a win win. Seriously I've never read such Republican propaganda in the NY times before.
3
Professor Yoo is worried about protecting the nation - the presidency - and Trump is worried about protecting Trump...
2
Thank you, Mr. Yoo for showing us what a fig-leaf of an argument Trump actually has. The smoking gun, the clear evidence of quid pro quo has been revealed, and you are saying the man trying to kill our Constitution is the real victim. Your last and soon to be second most infamous argument worked when you justified Bush's right to torture suspected terrorists. Apparently your fine legal mind doesn't know how to gauge the political atmosphere. This is not post-9/11 America when most Americans, including many Democrats, were fine with torture—just so waterboarding was given another name. While Trump has 40% of the electorate in his back pocket, there's the other 60%, plus the other half of the voting age population that doesn't usually even vote. I can feel the concern building. Trump's recklessness, fueled by advice like yours, may be awakening America out of it's complacent slumber. Pelosi felt the shift.
7
Abraham Lincoln once wrote:"If slavery is not wrong, then nothing is wrong." If what Donald Trump has done with, and to, the Presidency, up to and including the latest outrage, is not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable. The power of impeachment would cease to be a meaningful part of our Constitution, and we will have taken a decisive step towards what the Framers feared, and Donald Trump clearly desires: the President as an elective monarch. It has often been observed that the Founders put the power of impeachment into our Constitution precisely in order to defend the Presidency, and the country, from a man like Trump. That's true as far as it goes; Trump's abuses of his powers make Nixon's look trivial. But I doubt that in their worst nightmares the Framers imagined that the Presidency would ever be occupied by an utterly corrupt and lawless rogue, without a shred of respect for our norms, laws, and institutions, with no interest in or love of anything but his own self-aggrandizement.
John "Mr. Torture Memos" Yoo is worried that impeachment "could hurt the Presidency." Nothing could hurt the Presidency, and the country, more than failing to cleanse the office of this repulsive autocrat.
9
This coming from a man who brought disgrace on our country forces me to think that his judgement is lacking so how valuable is his reasoning no matter how well presented the argument.
3
Oh PLEASE! Trump is not engaged in the conduct of foreign policy, he is engaged in the conduct of saving his skin from prosecution on criminal matters once he is turned out of office. And he will do anything, including badgering a foreign government and holding the threat of withholding aid over their heads, to achieve that end.
1
A president should have leeway to conduct foreign policy, not extort other heads of state. Giuliani and Trump have been cooking this up for some time. Their conduct is way beyond the established norms of our democracy. This makes Watergate look quaint.
1
Professor Yoo has no credibility in this regard. We have seen enough of his writing from the past to know where he stands on these issues and they do not always align with the Constitution even though he tries to make the argument that they do.
4
"A president, even one who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing, must have confidence in the confidentiality of his communications or he will be unable to perform his constitutional duties"
Really? The constitution foresaw and implies protection of communications that are criminal? That is absurd. If the "wrongdoing" is on the margin and something that is a grey area, maybe, but asking a foreign power to investigate a credible and active candidate for President is clearly tampering with an election.
Like his opinions on torture, Mr Yoo is on the wrong side of so many constitutional arguments. This one is another on the list.
6
Professor Yoo must be living in a parallel universe if he believes, "Congress’s traditional oversight powers will force the intelligence agencies and the White House to provide the facts behind the Trump-Zelensky call and any delay in Ukrainian aid." This administration has been blocking Congress's traditional oversight powers since day one. If the whistle blower complaint had gone to the intelligence committees as required by law, we would be arguing about transcripts. Blocking of congressional oversight is the fundamental impeachable offense of this president.
1
Given how much Trump has compromised our national security, already, not least through his dealings with Putin, I can only call Professor Yoo naive, and in that I am being charitable. What would be most damaging would be to allow a president who has repeatedly breached our national security and violated his oath of office to get away with his actions and thereby set a terrible precedent. If Trump is not held accountable, his "anything goes" behavior and his blithe disregard for the law will establish a very abysmal new normal. Whatever one thinks about impeachment proceedings, Yoo's op-ed is, at best, a misguided and misleading rendering of Trump's unpatriotic and ethically bankrupt behavior. It fails to acknowledge the dire consequences of letting Trump's behavior go unchecked, as it has been for three years (or several decades, depending on how we count)
1
"A president, even one who is possibly engaging in wrongdoing, must have confidence in the confidentiality of his communications or he will be unable to perform his constitutional duties"
Wow, interesting statement, but I'd like to push back a bit:
1. Seriously? If the president is engaged in wrongdoing, then he should no longer be the president and should be removed by whatever remedies are constitutionally available.
2. Trump is already unable to perform his constitutional duties due to incompetence, negligence, and malfeasance.
3. Trump is not only not protecting and defending the Constitution, but he is actively destroying it (emoluments; engaging foreign powers to interfere in our elections; siding with dictators over our intelligence agencies, etc., etc., etc.).
4. This from a guy who wrote the "torture memos" during the GW Bush years that damaged our country immeasurably.
This piece sort of has the feel of a satire piece taken from the pages of The Onion. What kind of a "law professor" are you?
9
I'm sorry, professor you. The theory of the unitary executive only goes so far.
1
Mr. Yoo, you say, "An intelligence officer cannot file a whistle-blower complaint against the president, because the president is not a member of the intelligence community . . . The intelligence community works for the president, not the other way around."
Don't you see the internal inconsistency in your argument? If the intelligence community works for the president, then the president is de facto a member of the intelligence community, in that he is the head of that community.
1
Mr. Yoo, "If the President does it, it's NOT illegal" is not a valid defense.
4
Yoo's view of foreign policy under various Presidents is strangely myopic. He seems to forget that the administration he served under George W. Bush took the country into a disastrous war under false pretenses. He also gives Ronald Reagan sole credit for winning the Cold War, ignoring decades of work by all parties concerned. His understanding of history therefore is severely flawed.
1
Hasn't he already failed this time and time again?
"The Constitution vests the president with the authority to conduct foreign policy and the responsibility to protect the nation’s security."
2
The presidency is already damaged. There is no choice regardless of what the outcome is. Trump has no shame and had no regard for anything except his personal self promotion. If you see lawlessness and evil and do nothing, aren't you as guilty as the perpetrator? Democrats must stand up and fight. If they lose in the end and Trump triumphs, eventually someone will come along to right the injustice, hopefully before too much more damage is done. The illusion that economic prosperity and power are the only things that matter will eventually destroy the country if attitudes are not changed.
2
If John Yoo disagrees, the House must be doing something right. This guy's theory of the executive is based on terrible historical research and analysis. If you want an executive similar to Franco or Pinochet, Yoo is your man. No thanks, John!
3