Jamelle is so obviously correct in his suggested strategy that it seems highly disconcerting that the Demorates are proceeding forward on only two Articles forthwith. Can someone fax a copy of this Op Ed to Shifty Schiff (a new American hero, in my view), and Nancy? I'm sure they reviewed this possible strategy earlier, but Mr. Bouie presents it so compellingly here that they need to consider the issue again.
4
The GOP is happy with the number of articles of impeachment ; why not following the Mueller road map and also throws at him the kitchen sink
Why not add extortion?
Could Dems just keep the impeachment bill in the House and start the other investigations? Why send to the the Senate if you don't need to?
1
None of us know certain what effect this two Article impeachment will on 2020.
I'm of the Rolling Stone school of thought:
"you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you need."
There's almost eleven months to go before the 2020 vote, and you can rest assured there will be many more shoes to drop - trump, his GOP enablers and his entire administration are a virtual centipede of corruption.
Add to that and thank the powers that be, because our Free Press is doing their job, investigations will continue.
Hell's bells, just that picture of a grinning trump in the Oval office, with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov standing at his shoulder behind the Resolute desk, spoke volumes. And it said to this American "we (Russia) own you now".
This isn't over by a long shot.
1
plus need hold ALL nonshowing and nonproducing witnesses in contempt of Congress - to perfect the obstruction claims
1
VOTE for Bernie Sanders
The swamp is growing as fast as Global Warming on both sides for greed and power.
He has proven to be honest.
Right on all counts!
"The House should take its own sweet time and investigate many more aspects of the president’s perfidious behavior"
No one but Dems believes this...
WHY?
Because this Dem-led, hate-filled impeachment circus has nothing to do with "abuse of power" or "constitutional justice"
ALL of this nonsense has only one mission - which is - a desperate campaign to win in 2020
So in the Dems minds - the longer this ridiculous circus continues and gets closer to the election - the better they think this will be for their chances to beat our President.
Our President will be acquitted (rightfully so) in the Senate so, under our laws, he will be innocent and therefore will not be removed from office and will succeed in beating the Dems once again in 2020.
And the most ironic part of this whole sham is - the Dems KNOW this.
1
It wouldn't matter if the Democrats could prove that Trump was guilty of murder. The Republicans will not change their minds. Hang the big red I around his neck and remind people over and over again that he is a pathological liar.
Well, they had to dumb them down, didn't they? Like so much else these days.
1
Agree. Personally I do not care if they ever get to the impeachment vote unless the country storms the corrupt GOP Senators who are voting. Investigate, prosecute live TV, 24/7, ALL OF TRUMPS' CRIMES. From before he took office in tax fraud, election fraud, Russian spies, Chinese Spies, Turkish spies, Israeli Spies, even sleazy things he has engaged in should be talked about incessantly.
The middle class fools that voted for the criminal that is looting the treasury should be informed of his activities.
Although you might be right, in order to get at least wrapped up, Pelosi went with the most obvious of these charges.
But also remember that the tenacles of the most obvious charges also lead to the other charges you bring up.
If the Republicans bring up anything to challenge these charges and especially if Trump is put on the witness stand, then because he is known for shouting out stuff, LET HIM.
If he does, he opens himself to just about any of the other charges you mention.
His other wrongdoings are not isolated.
My guess is that the 'defense' will work like hell to keep him off of the witness stand at any cost.
Amen. He'll be remembered for uniting and inspiring hate groups and conflict during his frequent reelection rallies and encouraging White Supremacist groups on a weekly basis - much in the style of the Nazi party in the 1930s.
If this isn't a crime, it should be.
Chortling at the cruelty of his measures against migrants isn't a crime specifically, but it should be.
Using his wife, who came in on a fraudulent immigration visa as specialized worker to browbeat and accuse other immigrants as law breakers isn't a crime specifically, but it should be.
This is exactly the wrong path to take in the impeachment process. Ms. Pelosi and the House leadership know the chances of getting the Senate to find Trump guilty are as good as the proverbial snowball's chances in hell. Spelling out a lengthy laundry list of misdeeds will only cause the few persons with open minds on this subject to conclude that the Democrats are just picking at every Trump does as a reason for impeachment, in a manner very similar to that pursued by the Republicans in their impeachment of Bill Clinton.
Progressive Democrats and their voters would be wise to stop spinning the constitution and protecting our democracy rhetoric (with their history they’re in no position to do so) present the country with viable candidates and start speaking to the issues important to Americans. Impeachment is not one of them. Neither is taking peoples healthcare from them or confiscating guns or paying for wealthy kids college tuition.
1
I beg to differ. My article, "If Trump Isn't Guilty, Why Has He Been Acting So Guilty?" which came out as my weekly column this morning suggests that two articles are one too many.
https://www.newsmax.com/paulfdelespinasse/trump-impeachment-democrats-obstruction/2019/12/10/id/945307/
2
Speaker Pelosi is in one of the hardest positions in US History. She must convince a deeply divided public that Mr. Trump has committed acts that demand his removal from office. Our 2020 election is hanging in the balance. The fact is, how many different crimes is this lawless man guilty of, and how many can Speaker Pelosi convince our divided, basically Cold Civil War, public of? KISS--->she kept it simple and clear. The brilliant draft of the Articles of Impeachment will convince anyone not predisposed to believe Martians intervened on behalf of the Democrats to produce false evidence that has allowed them to accuse this man of crimes worthy of impeachment. Recall, Mr. Trump has morphed into God in the eyes of his supporters. Will he someday be held to account for his other crimes (brilliantly described by Mr. Bouie)? We can hope so, but for this moment, Speaker Pelosi made a great call with these two clear Articles of Impeachment. Thank you, Speaker Pelosi. The House Judiciary Committee produced a brilliant document! Thank you Judiciary Committee?
2
No. I trust Pelosi’s judgment on this and my own sense that Americans are exhausted by all things Trump. Further, that Republicans want to wait is all that we really need to know. They don’t care about the country, so waiting must serve their interests.
1
There’s a distinction between can and should. If the outcome is already known, why bother with more articles? The strategy is to impeach, knowing he won’t be removed from office. The prize is the election, not impeachment. Many of the obviously liberal comments make me realize how likely it is that Trump will be re-elected, partly due to lack of focus on the Democrats part.
2
Mr.Bouie:
It has become apparent to me that the GOP itself has too much invested in this presidency to back down. Many think of them as shills for Trump because they drank some magical Kool-Aid.They are not part of brain dead zombie cult. They are not. They are wholly complicit.
Those who are hoping that democracy will prevail at the ballot box may be sorely disapointed. I wonder if we will even
have that opportunity. Yes, that means we may not even have an election. The stakes are much too high for too many. The Confederacy aims to win this time.
1
Precisely how, exactly, it helps Democrats for the Senate pronounces Trump not guilty on 12 articles of impeachment rather than 2 is not at all clear.
1
Permanent impeachment is a real strategy. Keep the White House on its heels and voters scratching their heads about what next November is going to bring. At very least it will create a disincentive to corrupt political contributions to the President if the Senate is potentially in play and the President remains embattled.
Of course, Pelosi may just be firing her first bullet to force the Senate to show its hand and protect Trump, in the hopes that voters will see this as a betrayal of the Constitution and hand Democrats the Senate, after which they can remove Trump at will.
1
The GOP kept those nonsense Benghazi investigations going and going specifically to hurt Hillary and it worked.
The Dems need to keep this going right to the election.
1
Nancy Pelosi and Congressional Democrats appear to have decided to provide Donald Trump with his best chances for reelection. By abbreviating their investigation of the Trump campaign and his administration, they have provided him with the best possible environment in which to pursue a second term. All of the treasonous conduct concealed by the redacted Mueller Report will remain invisible to American voters. The pervasive corruption that would be uncovered by intensive interrogation under oath of the synchophants within the White House and the Executive Branch are waiting to be revealed. A systematic exploration of their conduct over the last 3 years, revealed at a steady pace over the next 12 months would insure that the defense of the Constitution would be in constant view for the entire nation. Obviously, Trump would do anything to avoid continuing the current exercise in absurdity that constitutes his defense. The continuous stream of lies, distortions, fabrications and ridiculous conspiracy theories would drown-out the self-serving political messaging that a Trump campaign would otherwise depend upon. The path that Nancy Pelosi has chosen for the Democratic Party is an obvious blunder and an abrogation of her own oath of office. This path simply clears the way for Trump to regain political initiative after a speedy acquittal by the Republican Senate. Failing to fully investigate Trump & present comprehensive article of impeachment will likely destroy our democracy!
2
James Bouie: you are a consistent voice of reason. Keep up the good work!
1
There isn't enough time in the space-time continuum to thoroughly investigate all the wrong-doings of this president. And adding more crimes to the list would sway exactly zero more guilty votes in the Senate. Republicans have stuck hot pokers in their eyes to avoid seeing the glaring truth with regard to Ukraine. Their eyesight certainly won't improve, no matter how many more crimes are brought to light.
Historians may be able to ferret out more wrongdoings over time, but Trump has already gone beyond the capacity of the English language to describe how bad he is. I attempted to look up the worst negative-superlative I could find, and none of them come close to describing the evil he personifies.
So why delay? What's the upside? Does the Trump sewer that we're being drug through smell any worse if we do it slowly? I doubt it. I think we'd just go nose blind.
36
Yesterday Leonhart published 8 articles. I think that's what they should have done
2
I really agree with your argument that the Dems
hold a prolonged investigation of all Trump's criminal acts. His supporters are the most deluded people that, I believe, we've ever seen. They have brushed aside evidence of his multiple cheating, vile acts against women, illegal use of charity money etc. to support him.
He has his supporters in a choke hold that will take time to undo. A longer trial will give his supporters time to digest all the awful evidence against this most awful person. As the old saw says, "I wouldn't vote for him to be dog-catcher."
We must think of history. We need to get a clear
written record of every criminal act he has done to guard against a criminal actor who may arise in the future. To accomplish this we need a more prolonged investigation.
There are going to be more trials of his supporters. For example, all those "in the loop" (his top tier staff) will need to be dealt with.
In order to make it easier for members of his party to vote against him, a longer period of being exposed to all his nefarious acts will give them a shield against his loyal followers.
At some point we as a nation have to examine ourselves. How did an upstart right-wing, white supremacist manage to gain the presidency?
Is Trump's ascendancy a one-off incident or is he a voice we're going to hear ripple through
the future?
1
As someone who supports Trump politically I would never advocate for his character issues. But supporting a Democrat from this field of candidates is unthinkable. Although I’ve never done so before, I will be canvassing for him and donating to his campaign.
1
In 2012 Eric Holder was held in contempt for not complying with subpoenas in the Fast and Furious illegal gun operation to Mexican drug cartels. Illegal ? Absolutely.
Unconstitutional? Absolutely. True ? Without any doubt. The hypocrisy of the entire Democratic Party is beyond belief.
Did Republicans attempt to impeach President Obama ? No,but in the future they will certainly will, whoever the Democratic President is. If Democrats wanted to stack their odds for impeachment the would have charged Trump with blackmail....much more serious and an unequivocal impeachable offense. They are attempting to protect their more vulnerable members in anticipation of losing in 2020, as Trump gains ground in critical states against all candidates running for President.
The US will be never again be the great country it has been if Democrats succeed in this travesty.
1
Consider the circumstances that led to the democrats half-baked, impeachment light process: whistleblower complaint; pressure from the media, house democrats, and constituents; less than one year before presidential election; an uninspiring gaggle of democratic presidential candidates: certain acquittal in the Senate; and Polosi caves.
Does anyone really believe that lowly charges of amorphous “abuse of power” and a petulant, self-serving “obstruction of congress” reach the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors”? What a letdown!
A formal censure without the threat of an impeachment vote would have better served both the moderate and progressive wings of the democratic party and had a better chance of getting some GOP votes.
2
If I was a trial lawyer (and I was for 45+ years) and I had a choice between asking a jury to decide 8 claims, some of which were strong and others weaker and nebulous, and picking to try only the strongest and best 2 claims, I would choose to try only the best 2 claims.
My sense is that Pelosi, knowing that with a Senate trial she cannot get 20 Republican senators with a "spine" to convict, her best bet is to "tar" Trump with the House's impeachment, and then, over the ensuing summer and fall 2020, focus on the court of public opinion voting in November 2020 that Trump is a conniving, lying, dangerous Russian asset and must be voted out of office.
39
@Martina
Thank you. Ms Pelosi knows also, as we all do, that when Republican Senators line up behind the president's obviously unconstitutional behavior, they leave a record for their political opponents to exploit. There are voters who pay attention to the actions of their representatives. The Republican Party is being permanently tarred with the brand of lawlessness.
5
@Martina: The trial lawyers I worked with (and against) knew and had regard for the difference between hearsay and reliable evidence.
@Martina There are only a handful of Republican Senators that will actually face any consequences over this. Just wait for Republicans to start trotting out comparisons to Clinton's trial. He actually committed perjury, and his protectors (Democrats at the time) refused to vote against him even though there was clear evidence of a real crime. The fact that the only two articles they chose are mostly based on hearsay shows they were unable to get any real dirt. Why they can't to try to get him on tax fraud or something like that is beyond me. This will play to the Republican spin cycle. I just hope the moderates survive in the House. I'm not actually sure she has enough votes to pass it.
1
I understand the author, but obviously Pelosi and others have chosen this path in order to get it over with as quickly as possible. While I understand this strategy to a degree (but agree with the author, that there are soooo many other things to investigate), what I do not understand is why witness intimidation DURING the impeachment process is not also an article of impeachment. Clinton was impeached not for his behaviour BEFORE his inquiry but rather during it, namely lying under oath. Trumps tweets during witness testimony, from the highest officer in the land, must be considered as clear witness intimidation, and that alone, should suffice for impeachment.
4
Try proving it. Twitter for better and worse is part of our culture.
1
So now the Impeachment process will move to the Senate. No surprise what that outcome will be: voting along Party lines, the President won't be impeached. Okay...maybe a letter of censure or something. What exactly is the Democratic Leadership planning as an outcome when it is all said and done? And what if President Trump gets re-elected? Start Impeachment inquiry all over again?
2
@NR I think Round 2 WILL be necessary, should the traitor be "re-elected" (you think he won't have gone much further to rig the election?!?).
@NR
I see....so the Dems don't vote along party lines in the House?
Nonsense.
1
I am a bit saddened but not surprised that the House leadership has decided not to include obstruction charges founded on the Mueller Report, allegedly to protect some representatives from a vote that could be tough for them to explain in a close re-election campaign. Unless it is explained why obstruction could not be substantiated, this appears to vindicate the President's claim that he is completely exonerated and to confirm a belief that congress's priority is its own jobs.
1
Obstruction of what ? There was NO collusion as Mueller confirmed. I’m still waiting for Schiff’s conclusive evidence.
1
I see that John Dean suggested filing the resolution of impeachment but not sending it on to the Senate right away, instead keeping it open and adding further charges when they become apparent. If anything, it would probably drive Trump even crazier than he already is to have it constantly hanging over his head.
3
In an ideal world filled with informed voters, politicians accountable to their constituents, and normal dialogue- Mr. Bouie would have been right.
Speaker Pelosi knows where the other shoe is going to drop. Even if Trump gets re elected, a Democratic Congress will run the show, not Trump. A who says he cannot get impeached again.
Personally, I think he belongs in prison together with his enablers that are already there and those that are surrounding him now.
3
Trump himself can end this nightmare with one simple act: Resign from the presidency. Immediately.
4
@Alan C Gregory Yes, he actually COULD "save Christmas"!
Are all his taxpayer paid rallies, where he attacks his perceived enemies, claims impeachment is illegal, really just more obstruction of justice?
1
Totally agree. Even though it's hard to question Nancy's political judgement, it seems like a great opportunity to further discover more acts of Trump wrongdoing and the complicity of Pence, Pompeo, Barr and Mulvaney in the process of shaking down Ukraine and cozying up to Putin.
2
Boule should get elected to Congress then his wishes and wants would have some clout.
In the meantime I am trusting Pelosi to do the right thing.
1
Regardless of how many articles of impeachment the House might approve, it only takes one article to trigger a trial in the Senate. The trial of Mr Trump is the point even if exoneration by the Senate Republican jurors is a foregone conclusion.
It is important to remember three critical facts regarding prosecutor discretion. First never charge the malefactor with an offense unless the evidence is overwhelming enough to convict. Second, as the OJ Simpson trial illustrated, even in an “open-and-shut case” “jury nullification” can exonerate the guilty. In the Senate Republicans are the Jury.
Finally, expulsion of a president from office is final regardless of charges. Al Capone was convicted and sent to Alcatraz for tax evasion not for murder.
The simplest and most telling grounds for impeachment Trump's denial of the greatest threat facing the nation and the world, climate change? In the first place, it's an open and shut case, from Trump's defunding and gutting the EPA to his withdrawal from the Paris accords to his own words on the subject. It's as if FDR had denied that the bombing of Pearl Harbor ever took place, and therefore had refused to declare war or to accept war powers--except that the climate emergency, unaddressed, will in the long run comprise arguably an even bigger threat than the Axis powers.
However, perhaps the Democrats and many others, just as they ducked presidential debates on the climate, don't want to go there, even though there are only a few years left to gear up for a green economy. That would mean we’re pretty much through.
1
Mr. Bouie could use a reminder about the purpose of impeachment and the conditions for which it is rarely invoked. I don’t believe perfidious fits in the high crimes and misdemeanors category, however nice sounding a word it is. The two bones of contention just tossed out by the Democrats in Congress also fall way short as no civil or government crimes have been committed, and it just amounts to a hate crime now committed by the Democrats.
After this charade, the Public Trust mantle is not a snug fit on Pelosi, Schiff or Nadler either, making that point mute. And as to Obstruction, well when unjustly accused and unable to call witnesses, how exactly is one to respond?
3
@Grant, 1 - abuse of power/office (bribery), 2 - obstruction of Congress (defying the Constitutional mandate of oversight of Congress.) I think that's what's you're looking for, for me to spell it out for you.
1
@Grant " no civil or government crimes have been committed"
WRONG. Soliciting foreign assistance for political gains is mentioned in at least 2 places in the CFR.
Don’t forget the disgraceful Maxine Waters. Shame on people who support her.
Actually, two articles of impeachment is two to many.
Trump should not be impeached. Trump should be arrested and jailed immediately for espionage, as a spy for Russia.
He should be prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to life in prison. And anyone who attempts to prevent that should be arrested and tried as an accessory. Anyone who stands in the way of fully securing our elections should be arrested and tried as an accessory. I'd arrest and prosecute the entire Republican Congressional caucus for espionage.
3
@Robert Henry Eller Agree, absolutely agree. He is a traitor, plain and simple.
@Robert Henry Eller, one of the the high crimes and misdemeanors of impeachment is treason, your call.
"Democrats, in other words, can use the power of impeachment to set the terms of the next election — to shape the national political landscape in their favor."
Thank you Jamelle, for confirming what all other than the unhinged left have known all along, that despite their grandest proclamations of the lofty pursuit of justice, the Democrat (only) impeachment of Donald Trump is first, foremost and all along has been nothing more than a craven exercise in the pursuit of raw political power.
My only surprise is that you were clumsy enough to actually admit it.
@MinnRick, actually, it isn't "a craven exercise in the pursuit of raw political power."
That would be Donald Trump's "perfect" call, attempting to influence the election with the assistance of a foreign government.
1
@MinnRick NOT an "exercise in the pursuit of raw political power", but an "exercise" in performing their Constitutional DUTY, in the face of ACTUAL "high crimes and misdemeanors".
Mr. Bouie is anything but clumsy. He is right about the need to be thorough .
But that runs into Speaker Pelosi’s cleverly
Analyzed strategy that says, in part,
Don’t let the Rs drag this out into the new year hoping to disrupt Democrats in their campaign.
Mr. Boule asks Democrats to look toward the consequences of November 2020. I suggest they look to the next generation. Expanding the charges against Trump's impeachable offenses go beyond politics. They must enter the historical record.
The Trump fever among his base will eventually break. Trump's short-sighted, greedy policies will lead to disaster in due course. Perhaps enough voters will realize that by November 2020. But if not, the end will be the same.
The U.S. has never seen a president as devoid of scruples, principles or common decency as Donald Trump. Democrats owe a debt to history. The flagrant offenses of this vile and vulgar man must be recorded today so that we can avoid falling prey to another demagogue tomorrow.
1
@Civic Samurai Hear, hear!
This article summarizes some key points:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/trade-offs-articles-impeachment
Bouie is correct in thinking that more misconduct is almost in plain sight. Pursuing additional investigations will only work if the admin either responds to requests/demands for information or the court compels the admin to do so.
Seems somewhat fantastical.
Please do keep up the good work of sharing your views.
1
There is no point in more than one article of impeachment since the Republicans sitting in judgement will not vote for impeachment regardless of any facts turned up in any investigation. The closer to the election, the less likely anyone will see impeachment as the vehicle for renouncing Trump. Once he is out of office, all the criminal investigations can begin. And there is no double jeopardy in the impeachment process. If by slim chance Trump is re-elected with a Democratic Senate, the process can start anew.
1
I realize authors don't write headlines, but this one confuses the number of articles with the number of misdeeds. Pretty much every Trump waking moment (except perhaps when watching TV) is spent abusing power and obstructing justice, often simultaneously.
3
Can someone please explain to me how members of the Trump administration can ignore subpoenas to appear and those for documents? Not one piece of paper has been received. Numerous people have just not appeared. Why isn't the Sergeant at Arms arresting those who do not appear or collecting the documents requested? Is there some other mechanism to enforce these subpoenas? Should the Dems be fighting in court to get them enforced?
Why would Trump or anyone else comply if there are no consequences to ignoring legal processes?
6
The House vote to impeach needs to happen before Christmas so that the Senate vote not to convict can occur in early January. That way Warren, Bernie and Booker can return to Iowa and New Hampshire saying they did their best in a losing cause and now it's time to move on by beating the present occupant of the White House in November 2020. It's all theatre and I'm getting really tired of all of the actors in this melodrama.
Isn't it possible for the Democrats to impeach again in the future? Even after the submissive Republicans acquit Trump on this charge? There are so many laws that Trump has broken it seems that the Democrats could start a new impeachment investigation practically every month until the election. It would bring our nation to a standstill, but it would be worth it to show even his rabid cult members exactly who and what their hallowed leader is and what he's been doing. Of all the citizens of the U.S., the President should be the most law-abiding of us all. But Trump is a flat-out criminal.
1
@lynchburglady Rabid cult members? You're taling about 63 million of your fellow Americans. How can this country function with 20% of the population are members of a rabid cult?
If there's any story from the last twenty years, it's not simply that Republicans became driven by corruption, racism, ideology, and lies.
It's also the extreme failure of the moderate Democrats: they have failed to adequately stand up to the Republicans, failed to promote the policies that the majority of the population believes in, and perhaps most importantly, they have routinely sold out to corporate greed. Any candidate that progressives get behind to change these problems they throw under the bus.
The one faction that will look better in hindsight are progressives, including such columnists as Jamelle Bouie.
1
I look at the impeachment process as a matter of constitutional duty. Politically it's a loser. If the Democrats had solid proof of all we know and suspect of Trump's corruption it would have no effect on his base, and consequently no effect on the Republicans in the Senate or the House. The only practical way to remove Trump from office is to vote him out. That means Democrats have to focus on the election in 2020, and the sooner the better.
I applaud the Democrats for having done the right thing, but now it's time to get down to the business of winning.
1
AMEN.
The Democrats have an appalling lack of strategic or even tactical vision. Trump is already celebrating the narrow scope of these articles. And the way they were buffaloed into thinking it was THEY who would suffer from a drawn-out impeachment and trial was mind-boggling. He clearly wants this to go away, and Democrats are meekly obliging.
WHEN, not IF, Trump sees his inevitable "exoneration" as America telling him to go ahead and move on to further and worse abuses of power, what will these timid Democrats do then? I can write the tweets already! "Two-time loser Dems are trying to go to the well a third time!" Don't they see that the way they are playing this, he has a clear incentive not just to commit more high crimes and misdemeanors, but to top himself, and blast all rule of law (except for Democrats, of course!) to perdition ?
Drag it out till January 20, at least. Don't give that lawless boor one night of good sleep.
It doesn't even matter at this point if Democrats sweep the Senate, House, and White House. Unless a LOT of these Trump people end up behind bars, the Framers' dream will be gone forever. Raise your sights, Democrats, for the sake of the nation.
1
Mr. Bouie, I completely agree with you.
I have argued for months that I think the House committees are putting too much emphasis on Ukraine-gate and that if they continue down that narrow path then they would be on a fool’s errand.
Besides his bribery scheme, Trump has complied an overwhelming number of high crimes and misdemeanors. All of those should be made articles of impeachment to show the public, and especially the Senators voting for conviction and removal from office, the extent of his abuse of power and his breach of trust with the American people. If they don't like one article, there should be others to pursue.
Trump is an aberration. And, if he is allowed to continue in office without consequences, the risk is that the aberration will become acceptable.
As of now the Executive branch and the Legislative branch are both inept and incompetent. The judiciary, so far, has ruled against Trump. Let's hope SCOTUS does the same.
1
The Democrats had better hope that their candidates are squeaky clean. They've thrown down the gauntlet and the Republicans are only too eager to challenge it.
I have to agree with Schiff: TIME is NOT on our side. It takes WAY too much time for the courts to rule on the simplest subpoena issue. The clock is ticking! The election will be on us before you know it, and every day is another opportunity for the traitor and his corrupt minions to work on rigging the election, and that's EXACTLY what the first order of business has been in the WH.
Quibbling over articles is not in our best interest, if we want to rescue the U.S. Constitution from impending tyranny.
It is, indeed, that serious.
1
Mr. Bouie. I am a 74 year old Vietnam Vet and a Reform Jew. America is my home. I love America in spite of it's sometimes flaws such as racial disparity because only in America--for now--can American citizens file law suits vs those flaws. We should be lucky to have even the right--for now--to file just two violations via a Impeachment authority against Trump.
I disagree that the Articles of Impeachment against trump should be expanded to include the entire roster of trump's villainy.
The terse and limited scope of the articles, is the best strategy. Even with that limited set of egregious and indefensible offenses, the republicans have managed to manufacture a long litany of rationalizations that pander to trump's easily duped base of ignorant, cognitively impaired, fact resistance devotees.
1
Personally, I’m waiting for the investigation of the extortion of Ukraine that Joe Biden confessed to on video and the ramifications created by Hunter’s Burisma connection.
Of course, I’m an old prosecutor with far less tolerance for criminal behavior by my electeds than the average Democrat.
Meanwhile, let the impeachment trial begin. What are the “high crimes and misdemeanors” again?
This is all some kind of crazy joke. Pelosi isn't defending the Constitution or our Republic at all. Trump has done more to harm our country and yet faces less charges than Nixon and to top it off his personal lawyer is still trying to manufacture "evidence" to support a Russian conspiracy theory as I write this! Everyone, in both parties, is more worried about retaining their job or the control of one of the houses than they are about protecting the American people. Do they not understand that trump is sidestepping their authority with every decision he makes and that he is rendering them irrelevant? They better think beyond the next election because as of right now, they are a corrupt and useless body. After trump wins again via electoral process, they will be systematically dismantled along with the current rule of law and truth.
It doesn't matter that "there's still a lot to learn," Jamelle. The essence of Trump's treason is now proved by the charges against him, the fact he won't allow witnesses to testify, and the hard evidence. He could be found to have rented the Pentagon to Vlad Putin-- the Trump Party would still not impeach him in the Senate.
Concentrate on informing the public, about what Trump did, how it robs America of a secure election, how it sabotages national security, and how dirty Trump's team is. Get that Indictment into every possible form of media, blare it past the Fox lie machine. And don't worry, the real media will keep uncovering Trump dirt.
1
I'm not sure you understand what is going on. No one expects the Senate to remove Trump. And the Republicans will attempt to use the Senate "trial" to repair some of the damage the Democratic House did to Trump. But none of that matters. The Democrats are playing a long game. If Trump misses his chance for a pardon and a Democrat wins the presidency in 2020 or even 2024, Trump is going to be indicted on the charges Mueller couldn't charge him with because he's a sitting president. I wish the Democrats would include those charges in the articles of impeachment just to focus Trump's mind on what is coming. He's stupid enough that it probably has to be spelled out for him. But just debating the inclusion of those charges offered as an amendment to the articles should be enough. Trump is about to become the first candidate for president in the history of the US who has to win to stay out of jail.
@Ronald B. Duke
God Bless Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Chairman Schiff, Chairman Nadler, Chairwoman Maxine Waters, and all the other brave Democrats in Congress and bravely testifying against Trump's wishes, who are all now fighting spineless Republicans to overthrow a menace to America and the world!
If all House and Senate Republicans back Trump there will no longer be any room for doubt in anybody's mind that all Republicans are totally corrupt. (Republicans won't admit it; but they'll know it beyond all doubt as well.)
The Democrats want every last Republican who puts Trump ahead of national security, democracy, the elections and the US Constitution on record for doing so.
It is also the ONLY morally defensible position for our wonderful Democratic representatives to take on this matter and we are all proud of them for doing so in the face of Republican hostility, treason and corruption!
1
Jamelle Bouie's incisively expressed and compellingly convincing argument rationally justifying multiple articles of impeachment is both warranted and critical to effectively impeaching and convicting the Vietnam War draft dodger. Notwithstanding the obvious predicates belying the two articles crafted by the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, advancing the incontrovertible, conclusively established pattern of vicious racial demagoguery and consistent anti immigrant xenophobia is clearly indicative of proof of the failure [refusal] to faithfully execute the laws of the United States and abide by the Constitution. This is precisely the approach the Republicans adopted when fashioning articles of impeachment against Andrew Johnson. Johnson, with aggressive zealousness, constantly campaigned against Reconstruction legislation passed by Congress intended and designed to assure equal protection, due process, birthright citizenship, and voter franchise of Black Americans. Fiercely resisting the substantive work of the Congress promoting civil rights legislation, beholden to the Southern planter class Johnson believed Black Americans were racially inferior and did not deserve federal protection. But for the committed activism of Congressional Republicans in the House, Johnson would have pursued his campaign of racial intolerance by promoting racial internecine. Johnson's lack of condemning KKK terrorism spoke volumes. We witness tragic parallels in 2019. Race matters.
For me, Trump having told the American People over 13,000 documented lies during the past 3 years (which does not include the endless lies during his campaign) is plenty to boot him out of office. Why would we need anything more? Why would we put up with a congenital, compulsive liar?
2
Have you awakend at night yet and rushed into the bathreoom to check for your own eyes beginning to look like Adam Schiffs'?
I worry that once-decent writers will fall into the pompous grimaces that The Eye Man employs just because they have to like the biomass emerging from his mind.
But I do feel for Ms. Pelosi. A person that far along shouldn't have to become the master of ceremonies for clowns in love with the sound of their voices.
Thank you Mr. Bouie for your call to include more articles, but it appears the train has left the station and all 'we the people' are going to get from the House is a tactical play that limits the complaint to two articles of impeachment.
But this can't be the end of investigations and congressional oversight, can it?
Other comments have suggested there could be a round 2 of an Impeachment inquiry if the Supremes open the gate for compelled testimony to congress; we shouldn't worry that all the House would get is a run on the 5th Amendment protection claims from self-incrimination.
If the House leadership decides these two articles is it, is what they have to say to a presidential scandal...then it will not be enough and a serious injustice will leave a significant stain on the failed role Congress will have played relative to its oversight duties.
Perhaps it would be appropriate for the House to empower, or deputize, a "truth commission" to use the full force of congressional oversight power, to investigate the unfinished business that Trump stonewalling has closed off to the public eye.
1
@Chuck Realistically, it would NOT matter how many articles, nor how detailed and "slam dunk" evidence-based they were. The repub Senate will NOT CONVICT!
Does this obvious fact escape those counting those pin angels? The impeachment is, in fact, OVER. This thuig criminal traitor will not be removed from office by this NECESSARY Constitutional process. He must be removed on November 3, 2020. THAT'S reality.
If forced to pick who has far better political acumen (let alone concern for the overall well-being of the nation) between this New York Times columnist and Nancy Pelosi, I don't think I'll have to struggle very much to prefer Nancy.
There are *so* many reasons not to extend this out indefinitely (really, wait months for the Supreme Court to *maybe* force Mulvaney etc to testify, just for them to lie their faces off?), but for me life is simple: if my idea of a smart strategy deviates much from what Pelosi is doing, then I should take a second or third look at what I think is the right way forward.
1
Absolutely correct.
Two articles of impeachment? Two?!
And we're to rush through it, zoom into the inevitable "exoneration" in the Senate and thus assure that by winter's end it's all yesterday's news, ho-hum?
And contrary to your advice, that's exactly what we're going to do.
Why? Because we're the Democratic party. The same party that nominated the only candidate who could have lost to a Donald 'Bleepin' Trump in 2016. The same party that's spent the last half century attempting to meet the Republicans in the middle only to find the middle ever receding into the right-ward distance. The same party whose idea of tough negotiations is to figure out what the opposition will accept and make that their opening offer. The same party that in the midst of tough economic times and virtually unprecedented wealth disparity decides that providing transgender restrooms are what John and Jane Doe are desperately wanting.
If I were just a tad more cynical than I am, I'd conclude that the Democratic power structure *wants* to lose, thus reassuring Big Money that nothing will change that will effect their wallets.
1
Pelosi's Achilles Heel: Her party could not withstand any serious investigation of corruption. Republicans, should they so choose, could easily--and correctly--point out the money-grubbing ways of many marquee Democrats.
There is a separate issue--sadly unimportant, because Republicans won't touch it--of how it is that previous occupants of the White House (looking at you, W) lied us into pointless, death-dealing, money-sucking wars, yet never a peep about impeachment was heard from the Democratic leadership. Just sayin'
1
I would add "Barbarous" to the list. Even if Trump by some magic has never committed a crime, his behaviors are simply barbarous.
Mocking the Times reporter, the pussy tapes, his reaction to Charlottesville. Soon as I saw the first item, I knew he was the American Id—its dark side—unbound.
Never use the words "wait" or "take our time" in relationship to politics. Things proceed dismally slow as they are while criminals run the country into the ground. Investigations are pointless when they never end. We knew three years ago he was paying off porn stars that's illegal did somebody say we should take our time that was three years ago what happened? Stretching things out in this digital age produces nothing but a scandal fading from view as the next scandal emerges. The Mueller report taking two years was absurd and serves no one. To drag the impeachment out will produce the same confusion and malaise. His criminality was obvious and all over the map in 2016 before he "won". He belongs in jail. Not tomorrow, not wait or calculate or stall or, but like, yesterday. We don't have time to play time games.
1
wow, wrong agsin. I trust pelosi's judgement more. in addition dragging this out makes no sense with elections less than a year away. continue to investigate, yes. but impeach now
2
Curiouser and curiouser - only TWO articles.
Please remind me:
Weren't we supposed to get articles that stand alone from the first Special Counsel investigation - recall all the young firebrands and their inappropriate language - what happened to that?
Recall - the whole carefully focus-grouped choice of word BRIBERY - what happened to that?
Recall the laundry list of accusations trotted forward by everyone's good friend Adam Bennett Schiff - Adam - where are all of them in this so very... very.... modest -dare I say lonely - set of articles
If this does not convince the American voters that this was a strictly political hack job by the progressives then I don't know what will.
I plan to vote the Trumpster out of office the way that we are supposed to - at the ballot box - the dems should be ashamed.
The only thing more disgusting than the daily criminality and incompetence of the idler, Donald Trump, is the stalwart defense of his odious behavior, by what is left what was once the GOP.
3
Mr. Bouie you are so right!
Half a loaf, Jamelle, is better than none.
1
I don't think most Americans don't care about impeachment. We just know it wont stick. What is the upside for the Democrats ?
2
Fair minded and honest Democrats must crying themselves to sleep every night.
Will it really make the author happier if he is aquitted on 6 charges or a million than are two?
2
Rick Perry is nuts! God had nothing to do with this man-made fiasco. Putin and his talented KGB hackers are more responsible for the the 'Chosen One'. Once they secured Leon Podesta's playbook, the fix was in. We the people want a fair election without Russian interference. All members of the current administration are culpable of the fraud being commited in real time. Dark monies funding their campaign war chest are clouding their judgement. Putin through his hand chosen oligarchs are investing in Kentucky's steel mills, and political campaigns in TX,NC,Al,MS,La.east to west north to south.
Let's do 20 articles; maybe 50! Boy would the show the Republicans. Size doesn't matter.
1
He’s right.
“I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and my base will still vote for me”. Are these the words of a President who really fears broader articles of impeachment?
Enough with this talk about impeachment. Broad or narrow the articles of impeachment are not worth the paper they are written on. They are so farcical to the GOP Congress and Trumps base, Chairmen Nadler might as well have written them in Paige Latin.
Don’t misunderstand, was impeachment was necessary and totally called for. History books will not be kind or sympathetic to anyone who did not take a stand against Trump. But the short term, is all that really counts and it is time for all Democrats to pull up our “Big Boy Pants” and build an impenetrable blue wall the likes of which has never been seen before. Winning in 2020 is the only thing that matters. It is the one message we can send to this President that says we see you, hear you and know what a fraud you are. You are Florida’s problem now.
Oh, and finally if that does not work, I suggest using mafia style muscle. Chuck and Nancy with a nudge from Mc Connell, tell Trump, they will drop a Supreme Court fight for Trumps taxes, if he simply resigns. I think that is a deal Trump would not refuse.
This is like the final blow-off of Resistance fantasy
Traitor Trump's intimidation strategies work wonderfully! He has succeeded in scaring Democrats into limiting their impeachment articles. The bully is in charge, and Democrats are such wimps that they can't stand up to it. You can't blame Republicans for being afraid to cross the criminal president, but you sure can blame Dems.
13,000 lies so far, and counting, according to the folks over at WaPo. It's a bizarre time we're living in. In a real sense the impeachment is a kind of dog and pony show but it has to go on nevertheless. Everybody knows this guy is a liar and a crook, rotten to the core. Jordan knows it, Doug Collins knows it, Mitch knows it. They all do, and that's why they cling to him. Same goes for the entire cult. Reagan had to wait until he died for canonization, but they're already into outright worship for this one. You could say he's the perfect Republican, for he embodies all that they truly are.
I agree. The House committees should issue subpoenas, hold those who do not respond in contempt, go to the Court with the Nixon decision in hand and get the documents they want.
Today the idiot paid 2 million dollars for defrauding donors to his foundation in what seems a violation of Federal Election Law, he has benefited in violation of the emoluments clause ... should we go on?
More is needed.
"“Our president holds the ultimate public trust"... Really Jerry?! What sentient being has EVER trusted the current POTUS for even a moment of his life? His own parents couldn't stand the sight of him! And regarding "national security"; if that is all that matters then we do not deserve national security - we can simply hide in our twitter and facebook worlds and hope the mean things out there don't come get us. Pathetic country populated by pathetic people.
If only she had access to the same legal resources as you, genius. Maybe she could hire you directly?
Disagree. Impeach him, lose, then move on. For God's sake, move on!
1
The view in a vaccuum: the downside of this impeachment for dems outweighs any upside
Once again - this go...a shortened waste of time by the Democratic Party. There will be no impeachment .... but there will be catastrophic results for the Trump opposition... The worm is about to turn .....
Yes. Yes. A thousand times yes. Keep showering him with his own perfidity. The stink in the end will be too much even for McConnell and the other cowards.
And Nancy sagging down to trump with the trade bill, clone of the last trade bill, the same day as the articles come out. What kind of moronic stupidity do the candidates who wanted only two articles because they are in a purple district and think the republicans will like them better if they let Trump get away with some stuff is absurd. The weak Dems again.
1
Of course the immoral, amoral, ignorant, oafish, narcissist Trump could legitimately be charged with additional impeachable offenses, but let history write them. If a person is shot in the heart, is he any more dead if you also shoot him in the head and gut? In the eyes of the world and most Amerians, Trump is a dead president already.
Why doesn’t the Times ever publish an op-ed against impeachment? So far there is zero evidence impeachable offenses have been produced but tons of hysterical articles on unsubstantiated hypotheticals.
Agreed. Hold the criminal president accountable.
I have this fantasy where thousands of FBI agents, military leaders, diplomats and other members of the executive branch sign a declaration saying, "In our estimation, the President of the United States is a criminal. We did not come to Washington to work for a criminal. I will tender my resignation at such time as the Senate acquits the President and fails to remove him from office."
But then I wonder, "would Republicans even care?" Would they instead cheer ,and then applaud as the President replaced these dedicated public servants with neo-Nazis, lobbyists and other assorted criminals, subservient minions in the mold of Bill Barr, willing to do whatever their Dear Leader demands?
Dark days for the Republic indeed...
Everyone is a critic.
Jamelle, rather than rule of law, you suggest acting on moral righteousness, anger and your own belief in your own judgment
1
I fully agree. In the case of Trump, breathing is reason enough to toss him out of the White House. That, and running up the water bill we taxpayers pick up because he's flushing the commode 15 times on every visit.
This thought...... watching the debacle on MSNBC all week.
Bumbling idiots confusing the voters and cementing victory for white might and kleptocratic oligarchic Russian satellite governing by legislators all financed by Russia thru alternate executions of transferred laundered funds to our 3 branches of government. Regular low wage workers and medium income professionals are tuning it all out.
Collusion! Bribery! Obstruction of justice! Treason! Perjury! Emoluments! Intimidation!
Oh, ...ummm...never mind
I just heard Trump call the F.B.I. “scum”.
Conduct unbecoming of the President indeed.
Sedition? I can hardly take another day.
Keep the process open and keep investigating through the election
It’s political all right
You RepubliRussian thugs are on the wrong side this time
The Democrats should promise to do everything Trump has done -- lie relentlessly, use the presidency for profit, fill the executive branch with snivelling cult-toadies while defying Congress as an institution, defecating on the Constitution and abusing anyone non-white in every possible way. THAT sems to be what rural white American voters want Maybe Democrat should promise to give it to them
If our society were more literate, intellectually curious, and civically involved, I would agree with Mr. Bouie that the House should have taken more time and gone into more depth before presenting its case.
But politics is the art of the possible, and the Democrats clearly learned from the inexcusably bad rollout of the Mueller Report. First, the Mueller Report was damning of Trump, but Mueller allowed the loathsome William Barr to publicly misrepresent its findings. Secondly, the public at large didn't read it. I did - I felt it was my job because I'm a History teacher - and it left no doubt that Trump's conduct is impeachable. But the public's reaction was just a big yawn.
So the Democrats were wise to keep it short and simple. What real choice did they have? This is what a society that entertains itself with graphic novels and marvel superhero movies requires.
In fact she is correct: Two will be more than enough. They are tightly written. They will be difficult for the Senate Republicans to deal with the simplicity Jamelle, these are not just Articles of Impeachment. They are also the ground rules trump will have to obey once his is found not guilty. If he goes off half cocked, we can turn on the Senate and say they are responsible for this brat and win a few more seats in November.
What am I missing? Isn't the simplest and most telling grounds for impeachment Trump's denial of the greatest threat facing the nation and the world, climate change? In the first place, it's an open and shut case, from Trump's defunding and gutting the EPA to his withdrawal from the Paris accords to his own words on the subject. It's as if FDR had denied that the bombing of Pearl Harbor ever took place, and therefore had refused to declare war or to accept war powers--except that the climate emergency, unaddressed, will in the long run comprise arguably an even bigger threat than the Axis powers.
However, perhaps the Democrats and many others, just as they ducked presidential debates on the climate, don't want to go there, even though there are only a few years left to gear up for a green economy. Yet that suggests that the Republicans have already won on the biggest (non-) issue of all, their mantra being, as Mel Brooks' caveman sang long ago, "let 'em all go hell, except Cave 73."
Sure. Go for more. Impeach, impeach, impeach all through 2020, drowning out the primary battles and the Democratic candidates talking points, debates, and speeches.
Impeach, impeach, impeach... and see a Republican blow-out like Reagan v. Mondale in November.
Spineless Democrats (expletive) it all up by leaving out Obstruction of Justice as revealed in the Mueller report. Now they can cry.
Mr. Bouie, I totally agree and believe this stinks of corporate Democrats trying to dispense of this process as quickly as possible so it doesn't "distract" from the Dem primary process. Biden appears to be the anointed one for this coming election cycle, with Buttigieg a close second - both of which want to continue the corporate Dem stranglehold on the party. 2018 made it loud and clear to Pelosi that her corporate Dem style of running things is no longer acceptable and the party platform desperately needs to be updated to reflect the voters needs and wants. No more corporate money running (ruining) our Congress, true investment in overhauling the disgusting health care profit industry, our public schools, infrastructure, and on and on.
I wholeheartedly agree! He should have all the articles listed. There is ample justification.
I am sorry for America that we still have so many people who are unable to recognize his atrocities and don't yell for impeachment.
We have sunk to a new low in politics and tribal support even when the wrong doings are apparent
1
Absolutely, sir, and thank you! These narrow articles amount to a cover-up of so much corruption and criminality on the part of so many people. Pelosi should read this, but she won't and here is what I think is going on: establishment Democrats, and the big money interests that support them, are terrified of the Ukraine story. They know that Trump could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans would still not vote to remove Trump from office. So, this is not about removing Trump from office before November of 2020. Establishment Dems, led by Schumer and Pelosi, have therefore decided that they want this thing over before the Democratic primaries begin because the Ukraine story apparently doesn't harm Trump and his fake-news base but it definitely harms Joe Biden. Moneyed interests really, really want Joe Biden to be the nominee. Of course they would prefer him over Trump, but they are more terrified of Sanders and Warren than they are of another 4 years of Trump. That's the ugly truth. They want this subject to be buried so Biden doesn't have to be answering Fox News attacks about his son all the way into next spring.
You are absolutely right. This was the strategy that the Republican house used against Hillary Clinton with their repeated baseless hearings into Benghazi etc. It succeeded in convincing enough of the public that she was corrupt rather than competent to give the election to Trump.
I wonder if Mitt Romney is perturbed in the deepest sense (or some other weird phrase that hasn't been used since 1953).
1
Keep this investigation open until the election. By limiting the investigation to the Ukraine, we are de facto saying that all the other charges: fraud, the emoluments clause, etc, are not impeachable offenses. They are. And if that is not said now, the bar is forever lowered for the next president.
And, once this goes to the Senate it's over. Why have it be over? The best thing that could possibly happen is an endless string of witnesses testifying to Trump's crimes and misdemeanors. And felonies.
Stopping now, because it seems like it is politically expedient, is the worst thing that could happen. The Democrats, once again worrying about what something looks like, rather than what's right, and in the end, losing on both counts.
2
I agree. We should have a long-staning open investigation year round. Even if Trump wins 2020, keep it going. Then when the next president is elected we should do the same. Every president should start their presidency under investigation. I'm sure some opposing partisan party will always find something they don't like and now have an open door to just investigate whatever they don't like. I'm not saying what Trump did is right, or it rises to impeachable, but I'm sure any group could find an impeachable offense of any president if you investigate for 3 years.
House Democrats insist that the impeachment process gives them no pleasure, but that they are constitutionally bound to pursue impeachment due to the severity of the offenses. Any offense not included in the articles of impeachment is therefore deemed to be of less severity or it would be included. By extension, Democrats are indicating that they have no problem with a president who obstructs justice, tampers with witnesses, uses campaign funds to buy off sex partners, profits from the use of his properties by those who wish to curry favor, etc. I could go on.
I am regularly told that Nancy Pelosi knows more than I do. If that is true, how do I not conclude that she has made a devil’s bargain with Trump and the Republicans to put the process to bed with a minimum of disruption?
1
"On the substance, there’s still a lot to learn about the president’s behaviors, hints of corruption and illegality that should be pursued." That's just it -- pursuing all of Trump's criminality will occupy prosecutors, scholars and journalists for decades. Trump will continue to resist having fact witnesses testify, and forcing them to do so may take years. Meanwhile, as Giuliani's presence in Ukraine demonstrates, Trump will continue to pursue his corrupt schemes to get re-elected. The House has a clear responsibility to do everything in its power to remove this crook from office immediately. If Senate Republicans continue to support Trump, despite the overwhelming evidence of his betrayal of the American people, then they will have to answer to their constituents for it.
Has everyone making comments read the articles, all the way through?...Pretty weak stuff.
A lot of the accusations sound manufactured and, really, just the opinion of (and not even believed by) the accusers.
The goal from the beginning has been to disrupt a presidency.
People, on both sides, now believe that if they don't get their way, it's OK to do as much harm as you can to the country you supposedly love (this includes news outlets like the Times).
Forget about addressing issues that are actually important, let's waste months on an impeachment process that EVERYONE knows will come to nothing in the Senate.
As far as "the divisions of an already polarized nation", the Times and their liberal partners have done more to exacerbate these than any other source. This whole impeachment farce is just a construct produced by the hostile imaginations of the left.
The Times can't even bring themselves to report, honestly, the reactions of the President. I WATCHED the interview where the President responded to the announcement of the articles...he did not "respond angrily". He was as calm as usual. More fake news from the Times.
2
Why is it that Trump's declaration that climate change is a hoax and then implementing in every way possible policy that supports that conspiracy can not be used as an abuse of power for an article of impeachment? This is a winning issue with voters staring Democrats in the face. They should use it because it's the right thing to do and because it's politically smart.
I can't believe House leadership went with Obstruction of CONGRESS as one of the articles of impeachment. Don't they realize most Americans have been conditioned to think Congress is (at best) ineffectual and (at worst) corrupt? Trump and his allies at Fox are going to have a field day proudly defending his prerogative to obstruct a legislative body that he's successfully painted as the enemy. It's like the Democrats want to keep losing and alienating most of the country. I don't understand why they didn't go with either Obstruction of Justice and used the broadness to bring in elements of the Mueller Report and/or formulated an article around Violating the Constitution to ensnare Republicans in their own supposed allegiance to the founding document while laying out a case for how Trump undermined the system of checks and balances by obstructing Congress.
Duh.
2
This is probably the hottest take on the impeachment inquiry: it didn't take *enough* time.
It’s amazing how so many are claiming the evidence is absolute and beyond question. Perhaps in the court of public opinion. In fact the evidence has failed to reach the high bar set for impeachment.
1
America did not defend itself against Russian hacking of the 2016 election. The US intelligence community knew about it in real time. Mitch McConnell would not sign a bipartisan statement condemning the Kremlin's role in the election. President Obama probably though Hillary would win anyway. How did that turn out?
Trump, with his treasonous public performance at Helsinki, standing next to his master, Putin, agreed that Russia didn't do it, throwing 16 US intelligence agencies under the buss.
America is politically incapable of dealing with a lawless president, even one who commits criminal acts in public! IN PUBLIC! It's too pathetic. Ben Franklin said you have "a republic, if you can keep it." I guess we cannot!
US democracy is just a sham. The US is controlled by its corporate oligarchs. The federal government ignores the will of the voters as is obvious when you compare polls to policies. Federal policies today are the exact opposite of what the majority of voters want.
Most of us do not live in the battleground states. Thus we are powerless. It's time for us to protect our sanity by focusing away from politics and America's future. Enough of the repetitive, frustrating, TV "news". From now on, I will indulge in news media selectively using YouTube; not TV.
Wake me up when it's over.
2
Except that neither of the two articles of impeachment drafted so far charges Trump with any (ANY!) crime.
"Obstruction of congress" is NOT a crime. Plain and simple. If subpoenas from congress are not enforced by the judiciary, they do not have to be obeyed. This is called checks and balances.
"Abuse of power" is incredibly vague and in no way establishes criminal intent or action. Was it an abuse of power for Barack Obama to weaponize the IRS against his political opponents? Was it an abuse of power for Barack Obama to unilaterally change our immigration policy without congressional approval? Where were the impeachment cries from democrats then?
This is partisan hackery at its absolute worst. If you don't like Trump, good news: there is an election in 11 months. Sadly, this impeachment sham is just another way for dems to claim that Trump (if re-elected) did not win legitimately because according to dems, there has not been a legitimately elected Republican president for 20 years.
1
Donald Trump is an impeachment count-producing machine. For him, high crimes and misdemeanors are just another day at the office. We’ve already seen that no amount of investigating will stop him from continuing to disregard the Constitution and repeating the same infractions multiple times. His transgressions are endless, and investigations could theoretically continue to the end of his second term. However, the amount of damage he could do in the interim is mind boggling. Waiting for Mr. Trump to commit more crimes in office is akin to the police waiting for a known murder suspect to kill again to give them a stronger case. So no more “paralysis of analysis”, Congress needs to stop Trump now!
1
As drafted, the Articles of Impeachment are a disaster. Leaving out everything in the Muller Report Volume 2 is shameful.
Over 1000 former federal prosecutors recently signed an open letter stating Trump, with corrupt intent, obstructed justice, citing his:
"Efforts to fire Mueller and to falsify evidence about that effort;
Efforts to limit the scope of Mueller’s investigation to exclude his conduct;
Efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators probing him and his campaign."
https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1
Please Louise.
1
Vengeance is a dish best served with two counts. Do you want to stop the damage he is inflicting or do you want a pound of flesh?
I agree with Jamelle Bouie: handing the process over to the ruthlessly unethical Republican Senate at this point would be a disaster, and the Democrats should expand the investigation. Other charges might include:
1. Stupidity unworthy of a president and confirming unfitness for office.
2. Nepotism in appointing unqualified family members to major positions of power.
3. Making a laughing stock of the U.S. and damaging US interests and reputation.
4. Lying, incompetence, wrongful and deceitful ascension to an office he was unfit to hold.
I am sure the lawyers can come up with the right legal language to portray these as serious charges.
2
We as a nation survived the Nixon pardon. I admit I wanted revenge and I wanted him to go to jail. But the Republicans lost the next election and we were able to move on. Why add more articles, even if that would slow down a trial until 2020? We already know that the Senate is too disdainful of democracy to find the thing in the White House guilty of anything, even if he simultaneously took a bribe from Russia, committed a sexual assault, and dissected a live puppy on national television.
I have to believe the next election will provide a correction, maybe an over correction. The Republicans, who are choosing to sing “tra la la, I got mine” should prepare for a downfall. And the White House gang should prepare for litigation once it doesn’t have executive privilege.
If Democrats don’t snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, of course.
They'll two Article of Impeachment will stick. There's no way around them without dishonor and disgrace and the GOP is very vulnerable to both.
@HoodooVoodooBlood
I sure hope so, but the Vegas odds on conviction in the Senate are VERY long..
No, the Democrats should pursue the narrow path they are on. If they broaden the issues/articles of impeachment - which will take some time - it is irrelevant, since, no matter what they do the Senate will vote for Trump.
After all, he can "go out into the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot someone and they'll still vote for me"!
AND IT'S PROBABLY TRUE!!!
So here is your challenge.
The Constitution requires that in order to impeach the president be accused of a “high crime or misdemeanor.”
Do some research every previous effort at impeachment has cited the exact law that the House believed the President had violated.
Now it is in your ball court. Put up or shut up.
Cite for us the specific US code and subsection that you believe this president has violated. No generalities allowed.
Then cite for us the admissible evidence, cut and paste quotes if possible, that of you believe supports the case for impeachment.
And anyone claiming that a crime is not required has been misinformed.
Soliciting interference by a foreign government in our democratic process certainly qualifies as a high crime. The “dotard” has publicly called on Russia, China, and Ukraine to interfere. And publicly denigrated the US constitution.
Who says that this is the last impeachment? The Republican Senate will clear him, of course. Wait until the courts liberate Treasonous Trumplestilzkin's tax returns and there we go again... This time for either tax fraud or for violating the emoluments clause. Then show in passing that his business is floated by Russian oligarchs.
1
How about going for the bigger crimes? Conspiracy against the United States and treason, with evidence of trump and his campaign conspiring with Russia, Assange, Wikileaks and GRU as evidence showed in Roger Stone's trial, and trump's consistent pattern of serving Putin against US interests.
Investigate and charge trump for crimes against humanity, both for kidnapping and abusing 70K children at the border, many sexually abused, some sold into trafficking, some dying thru neglect, and also betraying and abandoning our allies the Kurds, to be slaughtered by Turkey.
For these horrific crimes and more, trump's background laundering money for the Russian mob for decades, he should spend his remaining days in isolation at Florence ADX supermax.
2 articles of impeachment aren't near enough. Good. Save some for his second impeachment and to scare some good behavior out of him.
I think what Mr. Bouie really wants is to drag the impeachment process out long enough to poison the election campaign. I doubt if the voters would thank (reward) the Democrats for that.
@Ronald B. Duke The election process has already been irrevocably damaged by the current administration. The next elected president will be seen as illegitimate by the losing party no matter what. Trumpists got their wish, they have systematically destroyed the rule of law and truth itself. Hopefully they like the future they've created in which everyone is a potential enemy or spy, neighbors turn on each other for a pittance, and every single person's life is dependent on the whims of one unchecked tyrant.
I agree 100%.
There is no way that this evil, corrupt sycophant Senate will vote to remove this beast from office. They have stated that they are partial jurists, who would ordinarily be removed from a jury panel in a normal courtroom.
The Dems should focus on that thought, and prolong this process as long as possible. By doing this, they can overwhelm the voters with ALL of the horrors of this administration, and be in the face of the voters for the next election. They MUST give up on the Senate, because they will NEVER vote to remove, and hope that the voters will accomplish what the Senate refuses to do. True, his solid base will protect this monster at all costs, but when ALL of his misdeeds are brought out, I feel we have a better shot of removing this malignant tumor from this country.
They MUST give up on this inane thought of removal, and instead focus on exhibiting all of his malfeasance to the voters.
It's not Trump's impeachment that will get him re-elected.. It is the liberals insistence on:
1. Free healthcare for undocumented immigrant workers
2. Farm to table food for homeless shelters
3. Better movie roles for transgender actors
4. Slavery reparations
Those "issues" will get Trump re-elected.
@Aaron
There is absolutely nothing wrong with donating non-sellable but perfectly edible farm produce to homeless shelters and food banks. Everyone benefits.
Some health care (immunizations, TB testing, etc) are in the public good and are necessary, although comprehensive 'free' healthcare for undocumented is a bridge too far for me at least. Movie roles should go to whoever aces the auditions.
Slavery reparations are a fraught issue and should not be on the table for the 2020 race. Recognition and acknowledgement of past misdeeds is important, but there is no possible way to create equitable reparations, because there is no way to draw 'qualifier' lines (maybe all women are due reparations because they were formerly treated as chattel ?) and we should be looking forward, not back to times when none of us or even our grandparents were even alive on this earth. Insisting on reparations will lose a LOT of voters.
People absolutely underestimate the damage that Trump is capable of doing. Americans still seem to think that he is too dumb to do damage. This is a seriously grave mistake.
In my opinion, Mueller dropped the ball when he had the chance. If Mueller had charged Trump with one of the myriad of crimes he clearly committed as POTUS, we would be in a completely different situation. Instead, Mueller emboldened Trump and Putin, simultaneously.
Honestly, I don't believe that there will ever be another American president. I am will to bet 'dollars to donuts' that Trump will not leave office, and will attempt to ignite a civil war in American, in order to stay in office.
There's no way that Trump will take the chance on being removed from office. Because it's about 99% certain that he would spend the rest of his life in court, or jail.
It's kind of sad, but it is clearly too late to remove Trump. He's dug in like a tick.
Thems the breaks, folks.
Or...vote to impeach and hold it. Why pass it over to the Senate? Just let it sit. Trump is itching for a huge show. Make him wait. Let it drive him NUTS.
After all, isn’t Mitch sitting on a bunch of bills?
We need more investigation.Why is Trump sending anti-tank weapons to Ukraine?Why is there such a low unemployment?Why is he trying to secure the borders?Why is he supporting ICE?Why is he against free health care and free college for illegals?
Watching this from your northern border is frightening. Your politics are run by Putin, he picked your President and manages his policies. But Trump is taking hits from all sides now and it shows. Why not give him something else to worry about? How about the emoluments again but this time investigate his children, especially those in the White House, Ivanka and her husband. Why are they there? What do they do? How are their businesses doing while they travel the world on behalf of their father’s businesses? Why did Ivanka get trademarks from China? Who is using her voting machines? Look at the big picture, they are not political advisors, they know nothing but how to scam for future business. Investigate them and see what crawls out.
I am stunned that the Democrats are not focusing on the emoluments violations. This grifter and his entire family are swindling the U.S. taxpayers like they swindle everyone they encounter. Once again the sheepish Democrats disappoint me.
We haven't even seen the full transcript of the Zelensky call yet. Every reporter should be demanding that it be released. Republicans claim the call was "Perfect" and yet they refuse to release the word-for-word transcript? That doesn't pass the smell test.
I could not agree more. Expose everything. It's no time for anything but complete and utter destruction of the spineless and degenerate Republican Party. There are far too many loose ends to use a few to impeach. Build the case that the Republicans are the party of corruption and bring it down. Indict and imprison them.
1
It the dems fail to get Trump removed in the Senate then he will most likely be elected to a second term and the Democrats will look like "yuge Losers".
2
Honestly, I know that two is not enough...but one has to think of the end game, and the end game is the horrible treason of the entire Republican party, whose behaviors, insane as they seem, are just evidence of the real cancer that Trump only fronts. The end game is to take back the Senate and replace Trump with a sane person as president, and that doesn't happen if the process is too lengthy or the dems shoot all their was too quick. It MUST result in a proper election result. THAT's what must be the result of tactics and strategies for the end game.
Reading this article makes me wonder if the writer is in the pockets of the Trump Cabal. He makes supporting arguments along Trumpian lines. Sure, go ahead and throw all the arguments and potential articles of impeachment into the fray and muddy the water even more than they have been -- obfuscate like the Republicans. Thank you sir, but this article only helps Republicans with their conspiracies and outright lies!
Trump is widely and justifiably regarded by a majority of Americans as a pathological liar, a molester of women, a tax cheat, a draft dodger, a stooge of Putin and a serious mental case, besides which matters the Ukraine affair pales into insignificance in the minds of most Americans.
It is already a foregone conclusion that McConnell and his Republican accomplices will acquit him of all charges relating to Ukraine.
The best course for the Democrats would be to throw a kitchen sink full of charges up against Trump's Mexican Wall to see which of them, if any, can be made to stick.
My first witnesses against Trump would be Stormy Daniels and the other 20+ women Trump has promised to sue for lying about him.
I'd like to see Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz go up against them.
They would make mincemeat of them.
After which, Democrats could summon up a host of other witnesses with first-hand knowledge of his other crimes and misdemeanors including Trump University, his charitable giving, his income from hotels and golf courses in violation of the Emoluments Clause and his reckless handling of our military and foreign affairs.
Indeed, while the Democrats are at it, let them give us a detailed account of his whole sordid life.
Then let us leave decent, patriotic Americans to decide in November 2020 how best to restore sanity to this country.
1
Of course there is so much more. In reality, I trust Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Democrats are paid by the donor class to be weak. They are a pathetic lot that sold our America during the Clinton era for a percentage of campaign cash that the Republicans were reeling in from the donor class. They are high paid losers and Pelosi is not a "master legislator". She's a master at doling out the money that comes in and keeping the Democrats in line so they do whatever the donor class wants done on fiscal issues. The donor class could care less about any cultural issues that the Democrats go to war on as long as they deliver the tax policy they want. That's why the donor class and the entire swamp tremble in fear of a Sanders or Warren presidency.
1
Surely out of the ten instances of obstruction Mueller detailed the democrats could have used at least one more to add another article Just ONE!!!!! It’s almost as if Mueller and his team wasted two plus years for absolutely nothing.
Agreed. This seems like a terrible joke that there are only 2 articles of impeachment. Do the Democrats hate Americans and democracy too?
Jamelle Bouie is the vertebrae that the Democratic Party establishment so sorely lacks. The party's resident geniuses want to quickly clear the table of this untidy impeachment business and get back to putting their thumbs on the scale for a policy-free milkshake of a presidential nominee, who will surely bring all those wavering Trump voters back into the fold.
Agreed! Drag hearings out through the summer. Great free negative advertising against the deranged, lawless Trump and the Vichy Republicans.
Whether you walk slowly and carry a lot, or sprint empty handed, you will still get knocked out when you hit the wall that is the US Senate.
This has no bipartisan support! None.
This is not what the people want but what the Democrats want, masked falsely in a sense of self righteous honor.
This will give us four more years of Trump.
They are practically campaigning for him with ill thought out flawed actions such as this.
3
Continue investigating, you say.
“ Democrats could pursue testimony from figures who appear to have direct knowledge of the extortion scheme, including the president’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, his former national security adviser John Bolton and his secretary of state Mike Pompeo.”
And precisely how will any evidence see the light of day when these sources you cite cower illegally behind trump’s insistence they ignore subpoenas and they refuse to testify voluntarily?
Well, maybe - MAYBE - the courts could settle the issue by 2050.
No. Keep it simple, stupid. Two solid articles are enough. Adding on more runs the risk of further confusing an already addled public.
If the slow drip of scandal sunk Hillary's campaign in the final months, why wouldn't this avalanche of scandal continue to hurt Trump? I agree with Mr. Bouie's argument. This president is a disaster and even people who are inclined to vote Republican know he's deeply corrupt. At a certain point, the stink of him will overwhelm even them.
Yes, Jamelle is absolutely correct. The spaghetti test or velcro wall approach is the only answer to see what sticks. Throw as many charges as possible on the wall and invent some new ones.
Fact is, Impeach Trump is a Holiday dart board! Your corner bodega has an Impeach trump dart board in their back room. Spin the tail on the Donkey and win a prize. Dial a charge or is it a Wheel of Fortune style event? Vanna agrees to showcase the latest in Prison Garb.
Turn the Senate chambers into a Family Feud style event. A special Impeach Trump Double Jeopardy bonus round!
Make this holiday season a festive event and let all Americans participate in the fun and games. This is no laughing matter.
1
Time to investigate the Middle East Back Channel being run by Jared Kushner.
The small list forces the Senate to actually do something:
If the Senate acquits, it will be clear at election time that they are spineless cowards.
If the Senate stalls for 10 months, it will be clear at election time that they are useless at getting anything done on 2 very easy questions.
If the Senate convicts, then they will have saved the Constitution and regained their self-respect.
I can't wait to see some of the witnesses for the defense:
"Oh those aren't really crimes"
"Oh he wasn't smart enough to finish it"
"Oh but what about Biden, Obama, Clinton"
Bring on the witnesses.
Bring on a verdict.
Yet another “she’s doing it wrong” piece.
2
Agree. I think Trump's illegal domestic interference in the 2016 election should have been brought in. This would give Michael Cohen something to do instead of sitting around in prison for paying the hush money to McDugal and Daniels with a check signed by Trump. Cohen is in prison because of Trump's illegal silencing of porn stars that would have damaged his election. It only stands to reason that Trump should be joining him.
This complaining about details by infants and children on the Democratic party's left is a waste of time and mere erection of targets for the GOP-Trump party to knock over.
The most important-the one thing Democrats must do to undo their errors of 2016-is to vote-together this time-all for one candidate-whowever it is-my preference is for a middle of the road candidate-, preferably Joe Biden.
WHoever runs-as long as no Democrats decide they "klow better" and decide to vote Socialist-Communist or for Ralph Nader or Judge Davis, then it ought to be closer to possible to get a Democrat in office. Even old Republicans might be asked to participate and vote-as in the Republicans for Roosevelt movement.
The error which elected Trump was educated Democrats believing propaganda-(lies made up by enemies)-and deciding to not vote-to vote for third parties or nobodies-and , even the main Hillary supporters voting for third party candidates because they didn't want Clinton winning with too large a majority!
If the people who didn't vote-vote this time-(we all know how or if we voted )-Democrats have a better chance. Impeachment is a rusted and broken sword, used several times to no avail.
It is time to "put up", at the polls.
I agreed initially with Mr. Boule opinion that more articles should have been included and that more time given to investigate the many offenses by Trump. However, Schiff’s explanations as to why that would not be a prudent strategy; do to The Courts general complicity in putting Federal statutory laws & procedures on par with higher Constitutional Law issues. I guess putting partisan politics before The USC has contaminated many judges with dysfunctional blindness in protecting Our Republic. Further,The Dems should have fully utilized their powers at the onset of Trump’s tyranny.
1
Why stop at these 2 initial articles of impeachment? There is no constitutional limit to the number of times a president can be impeached (and no restriction on double jeopardy). Thus, the House, after delivering these 2 initial articles, can continue to investigate the justification for a new set of impeachment articles. The House oversight committees are standing committees, and can run a continuous impeachment investigation. With this president, there should be no cessation of investigation.
Impeach now with the Ukraine scandal as that issue has all the needed evidence to move forward. Then continue separate impeachment investigations as warranted on other issues that Trump will mire in the courts.
Both can be done.
"If the president is unpopular -- if he's mired in controversy..."
Isn't that a given? He's had a remarkably steady disapproval rating for nearly his entire presidency, with his base firmly behind him no matter what and his opponents equally entrenched in their exhaustion of him.
With that as the backdrop, I'm not sure I buy the premise that the best argument for impeachment is the ability to tar Trump publicly with widespread misconduct. People know who Trump is; impeachment is just making a record of where Democrats stand in response.
Look, I'm glad the Democrats are impeaching Trump because (a) I think it's the right thing to do, and (b) I think showing some backbone also has the benefit of attracting voters. But I'm unconvinced that otherwise focusing on "kitchen table" issues misses an opportunity to portray Trump in a negative light. Trump can make himself look bad just fine on his own; the Democrats best strategy in my view is to do what needs to be done to be clear they do not condone this circus of the absurd -- but spend the rest of the time reminding the country that the more sober of the two parties actually intends to govern if/when it has the seat of power.
Being the grown-up in the room IS a "relentless anti-Trump posture," and I find Pelosi to play that role quite well.
Mr. Bouie hits on a key point: "The quick impeachment has another, critical weakness: It hands the process to the Republican Senate and its majority leader, Mitch McConnell. Even if Senate Republicans decline to call witnesses, they still have an opportunity to use the proceedings to try to inflict political damage on Democrats."
I can't wait. I am stocking up the popcorn.
I have read about several paths I think are the perfect way to go. One - don't send the articles to the Senate, just sit on them. We all know what will the Senate will do and its not good. The second - send the articles to the Senate after all the subpoenas have been honored. Use the impeachment to our advantage, don't just hand it over to the Republicans to run roughshod over all the work the Democrats have done leaving us with the real possibility that Trump could be re elected.
2
When presented with incontrovertible facts the republicans simply deny, spin, and lie. This is what they always do and for them this has been a remarkably successful strategy. Watching all the hearings of the past few weeks I have an impression. The republicans come across as a pack of snarling, ravening jackals who listen to nothing, but only attack. The Democrats appear to be a group of mild-mannered puppy dogs who, although the truth and the narrative is on their side, almost always lose because of the absolute savagery and obfuscation by the republicans.
1
Right now the job of the Democrats is to avoid snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Regardless of the evidence gathered, Republicans will prevail in the Senate, and consequently, the country will be subjected to months more of the rabid disinformation and distortion. How this plays out in the 2020 elections is what counts. The end game has already been deduced, and Democrats need to hope their leaders have calculated correctly.
1
"Democrats should also pursue other violations, like the president’s open attempt to enrich himself through the presidency."
I'm disappointed that they aren't going after emollients. It seems like he's been profiting from his office since day one.
1
I agree with Jamelle’s aim - it is critical for our country to end the catastrophe of the Trump presidency as quickly as possible. But I don’t agree with his suggested tactic.
In the swing districts of this country that we turned blue - including seven here in California that Trump had won in 2016 - the path to victory was NOT keeping the focus on Trump. On the contrary, it was relentless concentration on and communication about those kitchen table local issues like health care that delivered a Democratic House majority. Organizing and knocking on literally millions of doors to talk with voters about the issues that matter to them created those wins, many of them by razor-thin margins. Those districts haven’t suddenly become liberal strongholds.
House Democrats had to impeach; as Pelosi said, Trump’s malfeasance left them absolutely no choice. But he’s not going to be convicted in the Senate no matter how many charges are brought, and endless focus on this is not going to help us win in 2020.
1
Jamelle, which Democratic House are you looking at? Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff appear to be the only two Democratic leaders up to the challenge. Do you really want to watch Jerry Nadler, the man flummoxed by Corey Lewandowski, try to manage sustained hearings? Do you really think that piling on more articles of impeachment is going to make more people believe the president is guilty? The odds of that backfiring are pretty good. Meanwhile, the Democrats have zeroed in on a fundamental threat--Trump's move to undermine the 2020 election. Do you really think it's a good idea just to wait on that one, to let Trump have more time to engineer a falsified outcome?
The discussion of whether to go wide or narrow on impeachment has been one of the least satisfactory op-ed topics I've seen in a long time. No outsider knows for sure what it is better. As for insiders, I'd rather trust Pelosi for better or for worse than go with a pundit class that has been wrong repeatedly in the last three years.
3
Well, here's the thing: while there certainly is a whole lot more to learn, it is NOT going to be learned because the WH is obstruction Congress. See how that works?
1
Trump stirs things up to get others off balance. He did it as a businessman, a celebrity and as President. His longest running gig is the wall. Everyone knows it’s a bad idea, including Trump. Its value for him is that it stirs things up. The best provocation, however, is not his idea. Impeachment is no threat to him but it brings his adversaries to a fever pitch. Don’t play into his hand. Get this thing over with and regain composure.
1
It's two for now. There can be more later. Nothing to stop that is there?
Al Capone was charged,convicted, and sent to prison where he died for failing to pay his taxes. He may have been guilty of a few other things but tax evasion is what took his breath away.Good things often come in small packages.And look on the bright side. To have been so ethically bankrupt, morally numb,ceaselessly navel gazing, and determinedly uninformed, it may still be possible to rebuild a decent place for people to live in the world when he is gone. Maybe..
2
“Two Articles of Impeachment for Trump Are Nowhere Near Enough
The House should take its own sweet time and investigate many more aspects of the president’s perfidious behavior.”
I agree and little more needs to be said. One wonder the why that the Dem establishment is behaving this way. There is so much and it needs to be exposed and shouted from the rooftops.
I seriously believe our democracy is in danger and not just from trump but from this horrible enabling repub party.
1
The house should take its time; the longer this drags on the better is make Trump look.
Trump must be removed from office as soon as possible. If the present articles of impeachment prove to be inadequate for this purpose, God knows, there remain plenty of other reasons for enacting more articles of impeachment. What law is there that limits the number of impeachments needed to remove an unsatisfactory President from office? In any case, I dare say, once we hear from the witnesses and read the documents Trump has managed to prevent us from seeing and hearing from the evidence against him will be super-overwhelming. When all is said and done I suspect that Trump will end up in jail when all of his previous business crimes become public. I can understand the reasons for holding back as long as the Republicans refuse to do their duty and reject this creep from their party. Both Democrats and Republicans must join together to rid us of the Trump menace if any help in healing the divisions in this country are to be realized.
"Democrats, in other words, can use the power of impeachment to set the terms of the next election — to shape the national political landscape in their favor."
This is just horrible. Using the powers of government for partisan advantage is exactly why trump is being impeached. Now Bouie recommends more of it. Tribalism and hypocrisy go hand in hand it seems.
Only two articles is like overlooking the murders and racketeering of Al Capone and locking him up for tax evasion. We don't expect and never get, perfection in our presidents, but to have one rampage through our sense and sensibilities of what is fair, right, balanced in American values and a leader only in the assault on a free press, clean environment, worker rights and lacking a scintilla of respect for the public workforce denigrates every word of the oath of office of the president.
2
It appears that the narrowing of the articles may have been intended to hasten the end of the proceedings. Although the circus in the House will continue until Trump is impeached, the limited articles should make for a short Senate trial. No witnesses need be called. The Democrats will argue on the basis of the evidence already developed, and the Republicans will offer the same defense hatched in an alternative reality. Pelosi’s immediate pivot to the trade agreement shows that she is done with impeachment and wants to move on to a positive agenda.
The Democrats will establish an historical record of this particular abuse of power. There will be an indelible official stain on Trump’s already disgraceful legacy. However, the limited charges presented will diminish the enormity of Trump’s Reign of Error to a mere drizzle.
As to current events, the proceedings will change no opinions, will do little to educate Americans as to how aberrant Trump’s Presidency is, and will let the GOP off the hook to continue their sorry role as Trump’s lackeys and enablers. Trump will be further unbound since all his other offenses to our Democracy will have been ignored in the very forum where they should have been called out.
If this impeachment attempt doesn't work, there will be plenty of egregious actions available to jump-start another one, sort of like a movie sequel. I don't know if double indemnity applies with impeachment, but no matter. Trump is a never-ending resource for impeachment material, the gift that keeps on giving.
1
Mr. Bouie,
I usually love your columns, but some of the arguments you make in support of your point today just don't hold water.
You are correct that anti-Trump energy helped to flip a lot of districts in 2018. But that same energy will be there in 2020 no matter how many articles of impeachment are submitted by the House. When is Trump *not* mired in controversy? Of course he always is, and impeachment is just the cherry on top of a huge mountain of a controversy-laden sundae.
The impeachment polling shows that Trump has solid support among 42-44% who don't think he should be impeached at all, and well over 50% who think he should be both impeached and removed. These numbers have moved very little in recent weeks, and appear unlikely to move further. The suburban Republicans who switched parties in 2018 have not switched back.
In a vacuum, I would agree that more articles of impeachment should be submitted. But there are other considerations. Taking longer to submit the articles would mean that the Senate trial would occur during the critical early primary campaign season. That would be a huge disadvantage to the leading candidates that are current Senators.
And in any case, Mitch McConnell will preside over the trial, whenever it is held. He and the other Republicans will make sure that Trump is acquitted. Better for Democrats if this happens in February rather than October.
Agreed. Two articles of impeachment are not nearly enough because they constitute an incomplete record of Trump's criminal presidency.
2
I agree. The Republicans kept a bogus investigation into Hillary Clinton's e-mails through the election. Democrats need to return the favor.
Articles of Impeachment should be voted out in August, with the trial taking place during the election campaign with everyone watching.
Trump has done so many outrageous things, and impeachment trial provides an excellent opportunity to inform the pubic of his criminal behavior.
2
Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion, but history did not absolve him of his greater crimes. I can accept the narrow articles of impeachment.
1
I think Pelosi is right. If we listed all of Trumps impeachable crimes it would give Trump a greater opportunity to rant and rave and muddy the waters.
2
Yah you’re right, he talked mean to me should be added
Abuse of power, obstruction of Congress? What is that?
DACA or Fast and Furious? Or both?
While we’re at it, how about Obstruction of Justice from the ten counts in Mueller report, Part 2?
It's clear to everyone that impeachment is a Democratic election stratagem that isn't working, but the Dems are so invested in it they can't back off; it's a perfect example of beating a dead horse. Either the Democrats can't see that, or they can, but realize that they haven't got anything else and there's no turning back now.
16
@Ronald B. Duke , the president betrayed his oath of office, the Constitution and the American people. Congress has a responsibility under the Constitution to do something about it. The fact that the GOP no longer cares about American democracy does not absolve Congress of its responsibility to act. History will ask only one question: who stood up for our Constitution in this moment, and who betrayed it? It will judge Trump's enablers harshly.
47
What is fascinating about Fox ignorance is that it seems to someone inside of it that people outside of it don’t “see” things. It’s like being told you’re insane, and half of a crowd has your insanity and the other half has a competing insanity. This post dismisses what seems obvious to me, that the president is corrupt way beyond the constitution’s standards of corruption, and even if it hurt the Democrats, they should impeach. If it helps them, so much the better. I also wonder if this post writer wants all wealth and power in fewer and fewer hands, is anti-labor, anti-union, etc. If so, we are political enemies. Of course, I respect his right to his position, but not the position.
30
@Ronald B. Duke
No, it most definitely is not an election strategy.
The leadership of the democratic caucus has made it clear that they felt the best way to win the election was not to proceed with impeachment. They stated that and that they would proceed with the impeachment regardless because of the severity of Trumps transgressions so as not to establish a precedent that the President was above the law.
The leadership of the Republican caucus has decided to turn a blind eye to these crimes under threat of being challenged in Republican primaries and risking their agenda to roll back regulations, when they would never tolerate this behavior otherwise.
23
Mr. Bouie assumes that starting the impeachment process precludes further investigation, but these democrats are Trumps worst nightmare and they can probably continue to investigate while all the while impeaching and legislating. They seem to love their work and just can't get enough of it.
40
It is clear that Trump will take any opportunity to help in his reelection in 2020 as he did in 2016. He has shown contempt for the Constitution and acts as a though Putin has control over him. The Republicans are not defending Trump on his actions, but just attacking the Democrats on procedural issues and maintaining that the President is above the law. Adding more of inpeachable actions by Trump will not change how the GOP will give up defending him and just fire up his base. But dragging out the investigation of more will end up boring many voters who do not like Trump's chaos so that they will tune out in 2020 even though they believe he is not fit for the office and Trump and his supporters will have the bully pulpit and the Democrats will be effectively shouted down by more and more of his immorality.
Additional articles of impeachment make good sense---now that the Democrats' calculus has failed. That is, of Trump's serial outrages they selected the most meticulously proven and incontrovertibly impeachable: bribery and obstruction. How could a critical mass of GOP lawmakers repudiate this ironclad edifice of damnnable facts? Well, they could and they will. Because Republicans have learned that by cleaving to their demented base they can defend their boilerplate diversions and press their fantastic counter-narratives without political penality. Their utter contempt of reality remains a winning strategy.
As we all should know by now, the act of impeachment is a political maneuver.
Democrats, of one flavor or another, have been investigating Trump since his election and have come up with little legal basis for an indictment. So, they settle for impeachable offences to try to satisfy rabid Democrats who cannot find a smoking gun.
The two articles they have settled upon have little chance of a serious Senate trial. They knew this going in. However, the Dems hope that they can taint Trump enough for his to lose the election..
In my opinion, all they have accomplished is to make the public at large sick and tired of their wailing and chest beating and it will only serve to solidify Trump's chances. The Democratic Party cannot even come up with a qualified candidate to go head to head with Donald Trump in a straight up election.
To make matters worse, if the Republican controlled Senate takes it upon itself to investigate Biden, et al, a lot of dirty laundry could be aired. I'm sure Pelosi does not want that to happen.
1
Head in the sand
Surely there is no limit to the number of times a President can be impeached. If this attempt fails to secure a conviction, better to leave some ammo for a second round, or a third if need be.
Investigate thoroughly; impeach immediately.
Mueller investigated thoroughly & Congressional investigations continue in parallel.
Trump directed obstruction would likely keep the enforcement of subpoenas tied up in courts until long after the 2020 election…another rabbit hole that rewards cheating, obstruction & abuse of power. Congressional recourse is impeachment for serial criminality, abuse of power & obstruction.
Time for Republicans (myself included) to stand up to the corruption or be called out for Trumpublican complicity.
71
@joemcph: Thank you for putting country over party. The House also needs to pursue Pence, Barr, Pompeo, Mulvaney, Giuliani, and the rest of Trump's merry band of traitors and force them to testify and be held accountable for their complicity.
5
@joemcph
Thene Jpe,
I hope you just vote Blue.
You can go back to voting red at some other date, but vote blue.
1
John Dean, the former White House Counsel under Nixon, remarked that the House was under no legal timeline to forward the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Given the current GOP Senate conspiracy to acquit, the House could just sit on these articles until the Senate got its own act together.
For example, the House could wait until after the primaries or even the general election, which would give voters the first crack; it could then forward the articles of impeachment to a *new* Senate only if he wins reelection.
The investigations will surely continue. If he wins reelection and solid new evidence is discovered through documents, testimony, or even new crimes, this could be the only president in history to be impeached twice.
In the meantime, the charges would hang over his head like the sword of Damocles!
2
Is it possible to be sufficiently outraged? Absolutely not! When I heard the Democratic counsel, Daniel Goldman, consistently return to the question "Who benefits from (the various things that) Trump was doing?"I breathed a sigh of relief knowing and seeing that the answer, again and again, was Putin. Focussing massively on this would have brought the real impeachment charge that is sitting in plain sight. Instead we get namby-pamby nothing. A thin gruel impeachment -- yuck.
Thank God for elections. Let us all hope and pray that 2020 works out.
49
@YoRalph THANK YOU
3
@YoRalph Representative Swalwell broached the subject of all roads leading to Mr. Putin...but I share your feeling about the "yuck" factor of a "thin gruel" of impeachment.
However, to be fair to Speaker Pelosi and others on the team...the "Abuse of Power" article mentions "ignoring" the national interest and playing into other foreign (in the plural) national interests.
While these impeachment articles narrowly focus on the Ukraine shakedown, the "abuse of Power" term seems broad enough to include multiple events (a pattern) of serving foreign nations against the USA national interest.
Maybe, hopefully, the final Articles will address issues of abuse of power that show Trump is not truly aligned with our national interest but avoid claiming he is committing treason, without saying it and having to prove it.
They are employing a KISS strategy, for better or worse.
3
Perhaps someone should check out how 2.5 Billion of some 14 Billion dollars the USA has given to Turkey in military aid ended up going to Russia for a missile system.
I agree with Mr. Bouie. The Democrats have surrendered. History demands that all charges be reviewed and included in the indictment.
Oh, my!! The Republicans may '....have an opportunity to use the proceedings to try to inflict political damage on Democrats.' Well somebody needs to stop them. That would be completely unfair.
Maybe they should stop investigating and get back to their jobs. Most Americans didn't elect them to "investigate" but to "legislate".
2
Time and resources are not infinite. We have a lawless President corrupting our country and stealing everything that matters while working to fix the election so he wins again. This is not something you just let sit.
Nor is it a certainty that Republicans will just acquit - nor does it make everything irrelevant if they do. When Nixon was to be impeached, the Republicans were just as hard line as if they would never vote to convict - then public opinion pushed the Republicans of that time, and suddenly they were telling Nixon it was time to go.
1
I agree. The Republicans are in open, declared warfare with democracy and the rule of law. Trump is guilty. Period. Yet they continue to dissemble. In their war against democracy, the only thing that will affect them is being put in prison or losing elections.
Censure, bad press, loss of esteem, loss of face, loss of the history's verdicts -- none of this will affect them in the slightest. What will affect them is (1) going to prison and (2) losing elections, and even now, we see that many of Trump's yes-men are are willing to risk going to prison for the thrill of a lifetime in holding powerful positions by which they can unilaterally impose their vision of government as grifting opportunity.
Democrats need to play hardball. Now. Beginning with Devin Nunes, who is up to hi eyeballs in chicanery and deceit with the recent revelations that -- wait for it -- he too has been moonlighting in the Ukrainian affair doing God knows what. Either he recuses himself from the impeachment proceedings in the Senate or he gets indited as well. Again, prison or losing elections. Sondland got the message.
Grind it out for the whole year. Never let the Senate vote, keep it tied up in the House until Trump loses a year from now. That'll drive Mitch McConnell nuts, him not getting the last snarky word and on-the-record lie. Democrats need to develop a little bit of appreciation for schadenfreude here -- it's OK to celebrate the downfall of certain Republicans here.
83
@Kip Leitner Wow! You nailed it...your thoughts ring of crystal clear good sense.
And boy...how painful it is to be in the political minority and not be heard by the majority.
As the article observes, offering up two narrowly focused articles is a dish served to the moderate wing of the Democratic Party, so they can avoid uncomfortable campaign conversations. (Really?!)
I remain agnostic on the wisdom of a simple focused Articles, while so many other transgressions of malfeasance remain unaddressed and uninvestigated.
But maybe in the end, it will be a KISS strategy that brings down The Donald. Perhaps 20 Republicans will cross over and do the right thing for the country and the Constitution.
But, assuming, what becomes of all the unfinished business listed by the author after the Senate votes to acquit?
Could there be an Impeachment Round 2 based on the Supreme Court recognizing the authority of the Congress to compel testimony and review tax returns?
What comes after the Senate does its dirty work of acquitting, assuming they remain craven to baser instincts?
8
@Kip Leitner Nunes is not a Senator. Thankfully.
3
@Kip Leitner
I always love it when people use the term "period" as if that ends the argument. It doesn't. Democrats can try to play hardball but they lack the depth of bench, and they are going to get worked over by the much tougher republican party. The dems have already lost in 2020. They just don't know it yet.
Why the assumption Democrats have to stop investigating Trump after his Senate acquital? Trump will never stop his foul behavior. He'll provide the House plenty of crimes to examine.
Impeachment is useless. Trump will be found not guilty b a senate with some members already compromised and willing to do anything to get re-elected. He'll then run on a campaign flouting his "exoneration". How about an ad campaign, directed at swing states and paid for by Michael Bloomberg, that lists Trump's support of dictators and oligarchs like Putin, Erdogan and the like? Maybe something bringing up climate denial and the multitude of actions designed to line the pockets of Trump and his friends, capped by the statement, "I'm Vladimir Putin and I approve of this message."?
1
I admire the passion and purity of thought which Jamelle Bouie always displays along with his writing ability. Usually, however, I disagree with Mr. Bouie because of his impracticality.
This time, I endorse Jamelle Bouie’s entire column about impeaching Donald Trump.
It is foolish and short-sighted of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic leaders in the House to rush the impeachment process by omitting large swaths of Trump misconduct.
Impeaching an outlaw president is one of the most important functions of Congress, right up there with declaring war. It makes no sense to hurry, thereby allowing Donald Trump and his staunch supporters to escape answering for Trump’s many high crimes and misdemeanors.
The American people can handle multi-tasking. Why can’t Congress?
48
If the Senate trial on Trump's impeachment over the Ukraine scandal doesn't compel crucial documents and testimony from the principle actors, Giuliani, Mulvaney, et al it will forever be viewed, at least from afar, as an historical travesty of justice.
2
Mr. Jamelle Bouie does not believe that abuse of power and obstruction of justice are insufficient to impeach Trump. I disagree.
At some point democrats are going to become aware of what the outcome of all of this.
Trump gets acquitted in the Senate.
Trump spends the next year celebrating his victory.
Enjoy the spectacle.
You only have yourselves to blame for it.
1
Why is it that the House did not add the Emouluments Clause violations, clearly a breach of the law. Follow the money....
2
Obstruction of Congress should be enough. I disagree. We do not need the kitchen sink to remove him when he obviously went against the framers intent of separation of powers.
1
If a Democrat wins the White House, when they open the books and computers, they will find out that the corruption in the Trump administration is much worse than we now know.
1
Senate Republicans voting for impeachment would be tantamount to extinction of the Party. Not going to happen. Dems are engaging in summer stock theatre.
It would be interesting how Chief Justice Roberts and Senate Republicans would handle the trial. Will Giuliani, Pompeo, Mulvaney, Nunes, Pence ... and most especially, Trump himself, finally testify under oath? One advantage of going quick is to get these Senators on the record, exposing them as cowards. Acquittal by the Senate will not get Trump voters to the polls - it will be the opposite. I hope the ensuing public outrage will be enough to mobilize those who still value our Constitution to vote in November.
1
With the Russian Foreign Minister in the Oval Office today to convey Putin's latest orders to his puppet Trump, we do not have the luxury of protracted impeachment proceedings. We need to effect our constitutional removal remedy now. Our very democracy and national security are at stake.
1
Trump should be impeached for perjury, following the precedent created by Republicans under Clinton. He swore to defend the Constitution when he actually he had no intention of even reading it. The proof of this is that when he was asked by reporters about the emoluments clause a few weeks ago, Trump had no idea what they were talking about and even called it "your phony clause".
Of course, Trump's real problem is that he is semi-literate and the Constitution is above his head. But he is not likely to admit to that.
2
It's sad to see the naivete & cluelessness of so many commenters
who endorse the weak / defensive approach Pelosi & the Democratic centrists are taking
They may think they're being "clever" by giving Trump a HUGE victory on NAFTA 2
the same day they deliver two weak & generic articles of impeachment:
"See, WE'RE not the uncooperative ones"
But that pathetic calculation is painfully obvious, not just to Trump --
who correctly mocked today's output as "impeachment lite" --
but whatever "undecideds" they think they're going to convince in the sacred purple districts
As noted in the Times' lead article:
"Dems made a careful political calculation intended to protect moderate lawmakers who face steep re-election challenges in conservative-leaning [sic] districts
They left out an article charging obstruction of justice based on Trump's attempts to thwart the Mueller investigation"
If that's the best they could come up with, why bother at all?
For Pelosi, the Ukraine whistleblower was the straw that broke the camel's back
But by focusing so primly on Ukraine --
and not the entire SERIES OF OUTRAGES that led up to and made it so intolerable,
even for the centrists whose fear of predictable & stale RPB attacks is so painfully apparent --
Pelosi has made it easy for Trump to brush off the whole project as farce to be mocked, rather than a challenge to be feared
The only way Dems DON'T fail is to do as Bouie says
If not, the blame lies squarely on their own cowardice
1
My thinking exactly Mr. Bouie. Two articles of impeachment do not begin to cover all of Donald Trump's criminality. Paying hush money to Stormy Daniels as president is just one of many of Trump's criminal acts that warrant an article of impeachment.
1
The House has been investigating Trump for three years and a phone call is all they have Trump guilty of doing wrong? Dig deeper. Surely Mueller missed something. Trump of course is guilty of obstruction because he said that he wasn’t guilty of collusion with the Russians. Maybe Avanatti has something new and interesting to tell us about. Stormy Daniels extorted money from Trump because he had a decades old sexual encounter with her. I wonder why she wasn’t prosecuted. She must know something else. Trump’s son runs his businesses. That should be a crime. Trump’s taxes should be made public so that his competitors can know his business secrets and methods of operations. Perhaps Trump can be impeached just because a lot of people don’t like him.
1
He's on article that should be added in conjunction with abuse of power. Trump should be impeached for appointing, aiding and abetting William Barr who is undoubtedly the most corrupt attorney general in the history of civilization. Barr acts like a paid off cop in an organized crime movie. Barr is easily as big a threat to our republic as Trump. Trump put him there for a reason, to protect Trump. Trump fires the highest ranking officials for no good reason except they didn't treat him like a god. But Trump keeps Barr as he attacks the FBI for investigating Russian interference, even though over a dozen have been indicted and many of Trump's associates are currently sitting in jail. Barr is a prime example of an abuse of power, Trump's power. Barr is proof that Trump administration functions like an organized crime syndicate.
3
House should vote impeachment and then start a parallel track on censure, with ALL of Trump's high crimes, issuing new subpoenas which will be rejected and again contested in court, and take that matter all the way to SCOTUS
1
In agreement with many commentators. Glad that Pelosi is in charge instead of the armchair quarterbacks of the left. Make the case crystal clear, and do not make it appear to be a vendetta against Trump. Either way, there will be no Republican votes for impeachment in the Senate, but the Democrats can make a much cleaner case to the public this way, both before and after the trial.
Hey you out there on the left!!! Do you realize that Trump could well WIN in 2020? Your instinct to push things to the limit is not going to help defeat him, but rather will help re-elect him (God forbid). The sooner you wake up and realize that, the better chance we have of defeating him.
As things stand right now, impeachment is guaranteed defeat. Would that change if the Democrats continued to fish? Certainly, there are many, many illegal and immoral things that Trump has done that would justify additional charges. Maybe the current public apathy could be changed. But the Republicans have forsaken their commitment to justice and the constitution. It is hard to understand how they support and revere this egregious, self-serving, immoral liar, but they do. They seem to thrill in making up bilge to defend this pernicious person. Why?
1
Don't worry, Trump will have to be impeached again and again, and again and again if by some horrible chance he is re-elected by people who don't care about law and order, and the Constitution, their country, or just watch Fox News propaganda all day. (or lack of news - Fox News would cover a story on a stray cat (or Bengazhi) before they would discuss Trump's wrongdoings.)
There is no reason to wait for further articles of impeachment. We have the whole Mueller Report that contains AT LEAST two more articles that could be ready TOMORROW.
There are many other investigations to continue though - emolument clause violations, campaign finance violations, tax fraud (what about that IRS whistleblower!!!), and human rights violations that should get Trump put in jail if we can ever drag him out of the White House.
I know Pelosi wants to allow people to campaign next year, but this is the survival of our Republic we are talking about here, not a Broadway show that has to entertain people but close shop before ticket sales die off.
The Dems should put forward several other articles IMMEDIATELY and then continue to investigate and vote on several more articles in February or March, then have another trial in April.
It is much more important to make an official record of Trumps crimes in the history book and SHOW the American people why they should be re-elected, than take time off and TALK about why they should be re-elected.
1
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was essentially forced into impeachment."
My observation of successful leadership is, force from below, does not chart the course. Leadership charts the course, loyalty follows.
That is not what we see. A small minority forced Speaker Pelosi to take the impeachment path. She knew then and now, it wasn't a winner. Her problem would have been a mutiny of the "how", not the "what".
Every Democrat voter needs to take a second and think. Every charge and accusation against Trump changes and morphs. Since the election, there have been a dozen or more, tell all books, that would bring Trump down. None have. This Ukraine story is a soap opera. Bribery? Yes. Maybe? No. Extortion? Could have. But, not now. Only the person that didn't hear the call says it was.
Between the smartest Democrats in the world and the stupidest President ever, we have wasted 3 years and millions of dollars. In the mean time, 7 million jobs have been created, China has to adopt a more fair trading posture and our southern border is no longer "OPEN".
I'm sending $25 to Trump, just because it isn't illegal. I'll send $25 to Gabbard. Just because. Maybe I'll vote for her. In the primary. Just because.
And I'd like to know about how the Saudi blockage of Qatar was only lifted once Jarad Kushner got his investment from a Qatari company in his underwater building 666. Smells like extortion....
I tend to agree that there should've been more articles drawn if not more investigation and waiting for the courts to compel more material witnesses to testify.
On the other hand, I think Pelosi is making the right calculation that this process shouldn't bleed far into the 2020 primaries and even the general election season.
In solidly blue districts it's definitely anti-Trump animus that drives voters, but in purple and red districts it's campaigning on 'kitchen table' issues (especially healthcare) that will bring more success. Lines like '10 years and the GOP *still* doesn't have a replacement for the ACA' and 'If you want the ACA strengthened and Medicare for those who want it, paid for by the billionaires who are bankrolling my opponent and his/her party, then vote for me'.
The overwhelming majority of the country isn't binge-watching MSNBC most days a week. I know, hard to believe but it's true.
Jaime, we read all the time about standoffs where American cops fire 40 or 50 rounds to kill one individual. Must be part of the national enthusiasm for excess. Two articles can impeach Trump as well as 10. I’m willing to trust Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler on this.
It's not ending. Mr. Trump will be reelected and the Democrats can impeach him every year.
While I would like to have seen the list we all know would justly suit this terrible man, in the end, I think these two articles are very hard to muddy up. GOP members of the Senate who acquit Trump will have to do so in a way that will leave them little to no wiggle room to say that their actions were anything but partisan. They will be on the record for all history as co-conspirators. If our democracy survives the 2020 elections and sanity is restored, Trump and several members of the GOP will be wide open to prosecution that won't have the repugnant hack Barr in the AG seat to save them.
Dear Jamelle Bouie,
I agree with you.
However after I thought about it all my conclusion is that the message needed to be simple so average folks can understand and be easily convinced AND because it eliminates the almost infinite alter-factual permutations that will emanates from the CONservatives. After all - as many have stated; you are either for impeachment or not.
1
We must stop him before he violates the Constitution, his oath, again. That’s the justification for speed.
I agree with all this column argues, but the only route to continuing investigations runs through the courts. Without demanding a speedier resolution of all claims of executive privilege, immunity, it will indeed take years. And now, arguing mootness in one of the very cases that might shed some judicial light, the House has insured it will take years longer.
This executive v. Congressional standoff, in the unique frame of impeachment, is a controversy that left unsettled, will empower future presidents. In the name of speed, the House abdicates it’s duty to us, for clarification, for guidance. And the byproduct is allowing a court system off the hook. It too has a Constitutional duty. To resolve controversy.
These issues are not moot. They are possibly more important than any one president. Argue it. For us.
Truth. Trump and McConnell will have the last word. The President will claim full vindication, Barr will start investigating someone, and the zombie electorate will forget the whole thing by June.
Some day Democrats may understand that restraint, decency, and respect for the system will get them nowhere when they are fighting an asymmetrical war against an immoral Republican party. Sadly, that day does not appear to have come.
@CD In Maine
Those poor Democrats keep putting their faith in the voters to see the truth through the fog and lies pumped out by the GOP and their billionaire funded propaganda machine.
To paraphrase Mencken, "Nobody has ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American people"
There are two articles, and these specific two are designed, for political cover owing to House Democrats at risk in Trump districts...it’s that simple. They can vote for one to show they took impeachment seriously, but against the other to show Trump voters they are ‘evenhanded’. Pelosi is a creature of calculation, knows she had to placate her nutty far left while trying to salvage her moderate middle. Proof this is theater and no more.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
With the Republican Senate all but guaranteed to fail to convict the President, a narrowly focused impeachment on two easily proven crimes leaves open the ability for a new President and a new Department of Justice to prosecute Trump and all of his associates for a myriad of criminal actions.
In June, Pelosi said “I don’t want to see him impeached, I want to see him in prison.” This way, we might just get both outcomes.
2
While I totally agree that there are so very many other articles of impeachment that could be filed, I think Speaker Pelosi’s strategy is masterful. It doesn’t matter if there are two or ten articles charged. When impeachment moves over to the Senate, it will be buried and dismissed by Mitch McConnell. This is going to infuriate Democratic voters and motivate turnout enough that we will not only vote Trump out but (maybe) take the Senate too.
Senators should think long and hard about how much lying they will continue to do for Trump. I know they are all afraid of him for some ungodly reason (dare to contradict the Trump, like Wray just has, and feel his Twitter wrath!) I’m not sure there are any GOP members left with any integrity - we will soon find out.
1
Send these two articles to the Senate, and continue investigating and accumulating evidence of wrong doing. Impeach as appropriate. BTW, where is the bill that approves Trump's emoluments? This belongs IN an impeachment article as that is the only place he can be held accountable for such behavior.
I am constantly impressed by Mr. Bouie's take as it's truly what I would expect from a dynamic and thoughtful NY Times contributor. I dare say Mr. Bouie is the most important voice of The Times at this moment. However, I will also make the point that for on the money and principled Mr. Bouie's take is at this moment in history, I would also like to suggest to Mr. Bouie to take whatever process has made him a scholar particularly as it relates to the actual stained history of slavery and apply that critical thinking to all things financial deception that covers the past four decades. Plug that into the nature and responsibility of institutions and then translate what it means in context to the question posed here. Sir, we lost any vestige of the integrity necessary for a high functioning democracy that is accountable a long time ago. And much of it is because the Dems that have the power to right the ship now, were just as complicit in previous failures as are the Republicans are now. This isn't "whataboutism." This isn't to suggest the Republican party isn't outrageously derelict in what equates to absolute betrayal. It's the sober truth that the corruption is so widespread, that the establishment Dems are incapable of rising to the moment. I do however believe, there is a growing chorus of those about to come into power, capable of what this moment calls for.
Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. It is pretty clear that investigations will not stop. Additionally, the Articles seem to reference a pattern of conduct, which makes all of King Donald's activities relevant in presenting the case.
One of two things will happen when all of this gets out. The first is that enough Americans wake up and demand removal. The second is that they remain in their "prosperity" induced slumber and reelect His Majesty. IF they do the latter, they will do so without excuse of ignorance to His Majesty's corruption. In the latter case the people will deserve what they get.
The author is obviously correct in that personal interest is likely to be the major motivation for nearly all, if not all, of Trump's decisions and transactions. Ironically, the way Trump has normalized impeachable behavior is probably what will save him from being removed from office. But the author is wrong about dragging out this process, which could then be terminated by the election -- let's hope. This is about more than one person. It's about the kind of democracy we have going forward. It's imperative that Trump be impeached to document his crimes in a meaningful way. Dems should not take the risk that this man's presidency is not indelibly imprinted as abnormal and corrupt. Only formal impeachment charges will ensure that that happens.
Democrats might end regretting that they did not begin impeachment proceedings when the Mueller report came out.
If they had started to impeach Trump back then, they could easily have added on the Ukraine affair. But because they started so late, the Democrats are afraid that they will run out of time as the 2020 elections approach. So they are forced to cut the impeachment charges short and limit it to Ukraine only. I wished that they had thrown the kitchen sink at Trump and made the charges all inclusive.
1
Trump is talking of “impeachment lite”. House GOP Leader McCarthy of “only two” Articles. The Democrats have handed them this talking point, which will make dismissal by the Senate all too easy. Democratic leaders should have slowed down and consulted with their party’s base about what belongs in the Articles.
Just watch the exchange between Chris Cuomo and Republican Rep. Markwayne Mullin. In Mullin's mind, the President has done nothing impeachable. I'm sure that's going to be the Republican response, repeated over and over. Rather than let them grab that narrative, perhaps these articles of impeachment should spell out ALL of Trump's transgressions, line by line, so there is no question.
This is exactly right. Please read this, Speaker Pelosi, and take it to heart. Anyone who still thinks that "facts" and "evidence" will turn the GOP Senators against their (cult) leader is kidding themself. You might as well ask the Hole in the Wall Gang to convict Butch and Sundance. They're not a jury; they are co-conspirators at this point. Keep this going in the House. There are mountains more crimes to discover.
2
Whether one article of impeachment, or a thousand, does it really matter? You know Trump is an "Al Capone lite" in the White House, I know the same. But for the "true believers," he may as well be the personification of the second coming. What matters is that he will likely share the scarlet letter of "I" for the history books with Bill Clinton, proving that impeachment is truly bipartisan, if precious little else is these days.
Trump's conduct is impeachable, but the job he's doing, decent economy, lowest unemployment rate in fifty years and so on does give him, warranted or not, a measure of political cover, such that those in Congress who will stand for election would hate to buck that.
We are all between the rock and the hard place. The choices ahead are not easy, nor without long term ramifications. May the most sober of us make the most considered decisions.
1
One has to wonder why some think a good stock market and GDP is a sign of a good economy when almost all of it goes to the wealthiest...and low unemployment rates and high employment...why is that considered good when half our populace cannot afford an extra $400 bill, much less any form of healthcare?
I do not fundamentally disagree with Bouie- but in some sense I do. Why?
The threshold for impeachment has not just been broached- but run over with a 10 ton truck multiple times during the Trump Presidency. Yet due to Republican majorities in both Houses and his party's slavish and cowardly acceptance of his crimes- Trump remained untouched. Ditto for large segments of Republican voters.
A Democratic majority in the House changed all of this. And quite frankly the Democrats waited too long to hold impeachment hearings. But ultimately they did the right thing.
The articles of impeachment fit the Constitutional test of high crimes and misdemeanors (Treason and bribery). Given the pattern of abuse throughout the Administration's term and likelihood of future serious offenses- the House felt compelled to act quickly.
Yet- impeachment was justified from early in this Presidency- and it is the failure to act that has emboldened Trump to commit worse crimes and to solidify his control of the government and boldly declare the Big Lie.
This impeachment and related articles does not preclude future impeachment proceedings and continued investigations. But if it is not sufficient for the Senate to convict- then the impeachment points to a much more serious issue with our Democracy. And it is in this area that pundits fear to tread. First, because it is not popular to criticize other Americans and second- because it goes to the heart of the democracy.
1
Regardless of the merits of Democrats expanding the scope of impeachment, Bouie is correct in his implied point that House still can pursue further impeachment counts after impeaching on two current counts and referring to Senate for trial.
Picture simultaneous Senate trial on current two counts and House investigation and hearing on further potential impeachment counts. Not a bad strategy that as Democrats blunt Senate Republicans deflection tactics the House Democrats are putting more real facts into the hopper.
1
There is a chance, even if slim, that Trump will be removed from office. The trial in the Senate will be presided over by The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The sobriety and seriousness that will be required will at least counteract the baloney that most Senate members have felt free to engage in to date.
Fatalism in politics is a poor formula to live by.
The hearings were brilliant and to the point. If the expert witnesses did not move the republicans to embrace the truth, more hearings will not sway them, they are trumped as is the part of our country that is the foxnation. There is much more to investigate for courts but I think the nation wants Congress to focus on peoples business, courts will hopefully deal with these law breakers once we get them out of office, hopefully behind bars- we are looking at you Barr. You who supposedly leads the justice department.
1
Rushing the process killed it. They need more. They needed to fight it out in court, as they did during Watergate, which started in February and broke open with the Supreme Court decision on the tapes the following summer.
Once the Mueller report was largely ignored, the inertia was lost. Meh? But, Congress goes for all this grandstanding, emotional venting ON TV. Everybody gets to talk, show their face. Love the drama, attention. To contrast, Mueller's report was a professional, legally proper document that stood on its own. Objective, largely irrefutable. But, Congress dropped the ball. This whole exercise could go on forever and Nancy P. could see that it was a dead end and quite possibility a negative. She did the right thing.
1
I am an Independent vote who is continually amazed at reading the comments today and every day to see how biased everyone is. There is a dangerous precedent taking place that will dismiss any future elections as legitimate. The Democrats are dismissing everyone and anyone who voted for Trump. If they were so upset because he won the electoral vote, then perhaps they should have been using their time and energy to try and change the system to a popular vote. My biggest concern and the lack of attention by both parties is that this country is in need of major fixing, health care, infrastructure, education, immigration, etc. Where are the solutions? The narrative 24/7 is the impeachment. I think Bouie makes some legitimate points but to dig deeper into the investigations and articles of impeachment may only serve to bury the Democratic party.
2
"If I were the boss...." I would suggest the public relations firms supporting the Democratic Party (I hope there are many: as a lifelong Democrat I sometimes wonder, since the Republicans seem to have p.r. nailed down) create a wide array of media programs to emphasize Trump's circus acts of madness. (Was it Guiliani or Bannon or another loose cannon who suggested a documentary to articulate Trump's worthiness? If so, apologies for finding myself in questionable company.)
It seems like the more dirt thrown in the air by Democrats only rallies Trump supporters to support the man more, and clouds the American mind further -- or the two American minds.
Is it possible the pair of limited impeachment articles are written in the extreme hope of finding a small number of Republican Senators who might cross over the aisle to vote to remove, and the sooner the better?
While there is a legitimate question of tactics on timing in the impeachment process, we are informed as to intentions by the history of the the Democratic National Committee under Trump. They had to be dragged screaming and crying to initiate impeachment in the first place. The entire history of the DNC has been to shy away and and even outright oppose the fight against Trump. They are dominated by rightwing elements who would rather go after the Democratic House reps who do want to fight against Trump's denial of democracy and war on immigrant children. And there is no use denying that most DNC members are horrified that a growing number of rank and file reps support drawing a line in the sand on accepting donations from Wall St and really rich donors, who of course expect their quid pro quo. Democracy dies on the altar of money.
1
I agree with Mr Bouie but see an upside; the expediency of the impeachment hearings saved us from having to listen to more of the Republican's attempts at gas-lighting the citizens of this country.
3
It seems to me that the Democrats need to keep their base in mind, not the Republican base, the latter will never favor the impeachment of Trump. Last time the Democrats got three million more votes and lost, this time they need to focus on the key states, electorally speaking. How could Obama win Pennsylvania by so many votes and Hillary lose it ? Barack got the Dem faithful out. If amplifying the impeachment does that, then go for it.
1
I happen to agree with narrow impeachment. It's not all about the national election. I think having Republicans go on record against very clear abuse of power is going to hurt both House and Senate Republicans. If you wait around for all the other information, the election will be over before we get it sorted out. Did or did not President Trump attempt to extort election assistance from a foreign ally under military threat from Russia? No one disputes the facts. He did.
That places Republicans in a very awkward position if they vote for acquittal. Not just in this election but in 2022 and 2024 as well. Any sitting Senator is going to have a hard time explaining their vote when the whole truth inevitably comes out later.
I'll bet Mitt Romney is chewing his lip right now. The White House and McConnell are pressuring him mighty heavily. However, Utah is not a state where you want to irrationally vote pro-Trump. He lost the statewide majority here. Romney wishes he could simply vote "present." Rep. Ben McAdams is in the same position.
That's the calculus here. A narrow impeachment not only protects moderate Democrats. You're also making it easier for Republicans to come over to the other side. There is nothing to debate. Clear evidence. Yes or no? GOP leaders are going to have a hard time holding their caucus together. McConnell's advantage in the Senate notwithstanding. Senate Republicans have campaigns to run too. I doubt we'll see a protracted trial.
4
I enjoy all of Mr Bouie's essays including this one, but I disagree with his conclusion. They can spend next year digging into the mess that is the Trump administration, but that will only energize Trump's base. The Democratic base was not energized behind Hillary and she still almost won. Since 2016 Dems have been fired up and turned out for every election and that won't stop in 2020. Trump will continue to do and say outrageous things post-impeachment and acquittal. I can't imagine lack of energy going into the 2020 election.
1
What is stopping Leader McConnell from declaring, as he did with the Supreme Court nomination, that in an election year the gravity and impact on the future direction of the country with regard to a highly partisan impeachment warrants a delay on an impeachment trial until after the election?
2
Finally someone in public life that understands strategy and how it applies to the election in 2020 and the endemic corruption of the entire Trump administration and the Republican Party. Please Ms Pelosi, follow the advice of Mr Bowie.
3
Thanks for this, Jamelle. Spot on. The speed of this appears yet another way Democrats quietly acquiesce to Republicans, in this case, fearing attacks of drawing this out. The speed totally plays into the hands of McConnell, who wants this to be a distant memory by the end of February in order to protect vulnerable Republicans in the election.
2
While in principle many more articles could be brought, more is not necessarily better, effective or worthwhile. All presidents (and every other politician) have in some fashion pressured external and internal people, organizations and countries for some type of gain, and not necessarily for the "good of country" and assuredly without zero "payoff" personally and/or politically. It is naive to believe otherwise.
That being said, 2 or 20 articles matters not. The point has been made by the House. Then the Senate will most assuredly have a speedy trial and acquit him well prior to the election. Why beat a dead horse?
Ignoring Robert Mueller's report is an enormous error. The report points to Trump's links to Russia, which in part dictate his behavior towards Ukraine.
Trump serves two masters: his own greed and Vladimir Putin. They become one in Ukraine.
What does Putin have on Trump? The Mueller document comes up with people and events that could tell us.
7
@B.
Yes. It was a professional, objective document that stood on its own without fanfare or emotional grandstand. Everything was there. It was spoon fed for Congressional action. They dropped the ball.
Excellent article.
The articles are premature and there is no benefit to the country or the democrats for a referral to the Senate.
2
More charges, more opportunity to tell the story for history. Big miss here, especially since the case may not be successful.
2
To do what you propose would, in essence, mean leaving Trump to fill out his term with no impeachment. You want an endless investigation which will distract Congress from it's other duties. You hope that it will stir up enough additional dirt to affect the election, when it will -- more likely -- muddy the waters, and increase the divisiveness in the country.
And you are wrong that Mitch McConnell will control things in the Senate. There will be a trial with Chief Justice Roberts in charge. If Trump's defense tries to call irrelevant people like the Bidens as witnesses, the Democrats can raise objections and Roberts will rule on the acceptability.
I admire how Schiff carried out the investigation, but it was not ideal to have him in the dual roles of chief investigator and *judge* ruling on various Republican motions.
Trump's actions in Syria and with Turkey as well as his interference with the Navy's sanctions on a war criminal may not be impeachable, but they have upset most Republican Senators. Maybe that will be enough to turn the tide when it is time for them to vote. (And his inability to use his influence to candidates he supported elected as governor in Kentucky and Louisiana is surely on their minds, albeit certainly not impeachable.)
2
Our government shows, once again, that it is capable of making quick decisions. I haven't seen this much movement, this quickly, since the Iraq War was declared in 2002. The Democrats moved very quickly then too.
The country needs this massive disruption right now. If we didn't have this people might be thinking about the lies that are keeping us in Afghanistan and Iraq (and Syria and a half dozen other countries).
we don't have time for distractions. Trump is lying about things and is mean. He is rude! We need to address that now- then we can worry about sending more troops to Syria and more soldiers, to die for nothing, in Iraq and Afghanistan.
If we had a functioning democracy we would be at war with Russia right now. I am ashamed when I see twenty something's on the street: they could be in Ukraine or Syria right now. Or in a hero body bag. What is happening to our country?
1
Thank you for this column as it expresses exactly what I think about the narrow scope and the quick process.
2
There are arguments to be made for ether moving quickly or for an extended impeachment investigation and to regard either with caution and no insignificant measure of fear. The path now seems to be set. Let us hope that Speaker Pelosi and her lieutenants have chosen the right one to rid us of this monster within the year at any rate.
2
I too wish they would take more time. However, after hearing Adam Schiff's explanation yesterday as to why they were proceeding with only two Articles of Impeachment made sense. There is an urgency to make sure that the 2020 election is not tainted again, as it was in 2016.
Whether the Senate votes to not convict Trump, there will be a lot more testimony to come out. despite the Republicans strategy.
In the meantime the Intelligence Committee can still seek information, irregardless of of the Senate.
I am hoping for another Whistleblower myself. Perhaps from the IRS or from the White House. Or perhaps George Conway is doing his own Investigation. I am sure he gets a lot of info from KellyAnn.
1
These first two articles of impeachment are clear and self-evidently true. The Senate will defeat them of course, on childish claims that reality never happened, and that there is not evidence to prove that Donald Trump even exists.
But in rubbing the nation's nose in the Senate's absolute refusal (once again) to do its constitutional duty to consider the evidence, the impeachment process will illustrate more clearly than ever for all voters that Trumpism is a form of non-government that is leading us into dictatorship.
For the next two articles, I suggest Jim Comey's firing, and the illegal replacement of the Secretary of State with someone willing to help Giuliani's mission as an unregistered foreign agent.
I don’t think we should all repeat the GOP talking point that the Senate won't impeach trump. We don't know what will happen in a senate trial. There is no reason to state that we accept what the GOP wants us to think is a foregone conclusion. We should hold the senate accountable. Contact members of the senate and tell them to do their job, to uphold the constitution.
3
Prolonging the hearings will lead to an unfair Democratic presidential candidate selection process in which progressive popular senators like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren will be restricted by mandatory attendance in the Senate unable to campaign, while large donor candidates like Biden and Buttigieg will be free to roam about Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada and gobble up all the publicity.
The impeachment will not change anything unless a large number of Republican Senators suddenly see the light and vote with the Democrats to remove him from office. There is no evidence that there is sufficient pressure in the red states to lead this to happen. The hearings have not resulted in a significant drop in Trump's favorability ratings.
When the process is turned over to the Republican Senate we can expect it to be equally partisan. They will focus on the backdoor nepotism of Joe Biden's and his son, which was their plan all along. They get to go second in this process and thus they get the final word in the partisan theatrics.
So the only person who benefits from prolonging the process is Pete Buttigieg, who the polls indicate is the weakest of the four leading Democratic contenders in his ability to defeat Trump. If the purpose of the impeachment process is to remove Trump form office then the entire plan seems fatally flawed to me.
2
Bouie is essentially calling for continuous investigation, but not impeachment. While very tempting in the abstract, in fact it would be a bad strategy, both distracting and inconclusive.
The House is not set up for such investigative work and even a special investigator or prosecutor will take a long time and may provide inconclusive results. Look at how disappointing Mueller was.
For example, I was re-reading the work of Edward Walsh as independent counsel for Iran-Contra back in the Reagan-Bush era. As entertaining as Ollie North and Fawn Hall were, in the end the administration thwarted the investigation by a combination of lying at the highest level (Bush) and pardons.
1
"it will be anti-Trump energy that drives the outcome next year. If the president is unpopular — if he’s mired in controversy — Democrats will likely win"
This intense desire to win uses "impeachment" not to impeach but to slime.
It does that because it does not trust the voters to get it right this time. "if Trump can overcome scandal and recover ground with some voters, he’ll win re-election."
Voters will figure out this distrust, and this misuse of the process. That too can lead to defeat. It would deserve defeat.
Just win straight up. Run Bernie or Warren, and just defeat Trump.
"Centrists" don't want to do that, because they don't want reform. They want status quo ante, more of the same as before Trump.
2
Jamelle is so very wrong and Nancy Pelosi is so very right. To engage in an endless investigation will open up the Democratic Party to charges of obstructionism. The charges as listed are succinct and easy to understand. And incidentally, while Congressional races are won district by district, presidential elections are won state by state. There is no such thing as a national Presidential election. If there were, Hillary would be president.
3
I completely agree.
It’s incredible to me that the impeachment process has focused on the events related to Ukraine, rather than on the findings of the Mueller investigation.
In the parts of the impeachment hearings I watched, the Republicans seemed to make the impeachment about Biden, Schiff, the whistleblower, and the witnesses themselves. They succeeded, I believe, in challenging the notion that Trump did ANYTHING wrong. After all, Ukraine eventually received the military aid, right?
Trump will almost certainly be re-elected, unfortunately.
1
I meant to write, the impeachment process has focused ONLY on the events related to Ukraine.
Well, if the Democrats keep their majority in the house, they will have more opportunity to impeach trump again during his 2nd term.
trump is not going to change his behavior.
So we can go through this again perhaps with more articles of impeachment.
The Democrats should restart the whole procedure shortly after his reelection.
2
Hey Jamelle, delay is exactly what President Trump wants. Speaker Pelosi is correct in her strategy of keeping it simple and quick. We all know that the Republican controlled Senate will never convict Trump but the trial will shine the light on their enabling Trump in his abuse of The Constitution of the United States of America.
4
In theory what Bouie writes makes sense but, in reality, as Pelosi shrewdly recognizes, it's not practical because of the inevitable endless delays Republicans will put forth, leaving Trump open to committing even more crimes and likely further turning off the public.
Better to let the hearing in the Senate provide witness testimonies the House can't expeditiously get and I can't wait to hear under oath the likes of Pompeo, Mulvaney and Bolton!
1
I agree...get as much information as possible. Make the case so compelling there will not be a chance of escape. Furthermore, the documentation is important for historical reasons. Go for it all. The campaigning will go on regardless, and will affect everyone, NOT just Dems. The Dems have rightness on their side. Like my mother always told me, "make hay while the sun shines".
2
I disagree that we should wait and get testimony from everyone needed. It's not going to happen.
One has merely to look at the example of the subpoena of the white house council last spring *that is still in the courts* to show that there is little or no chance to get the people really needed to testify in any kind of timely manner.
There has never been a situation that a president has blocked *all* testimony of his staff and cabinet.
2
"Close scrutiny will also discourage the president from new attempts to leverage his office for personal gain"
This article expressed many "truths" like the one above that are not based in fact or logic.
The day after Muller testified to Congress, Trump was at it again.
No, less is much more in this case. The Democrats made the right choice on the Article.
2
And that was mostly thanks to Attorney General William Barr's wildly misleading summary of Mueller's report. By the time Mueller testified, despite all he said then also, it was too late - in many people's minds it was all over and done with. The exact same thing will happen this time around, too. The Democrats have made a huge blunder.
3
Bouie is correct when he says that Pelosi was forced into impeachment.
She thinks it won't make any difference to dyed-in-the-wool Trump voters or the Republican majority Senate but feels that it will take oxygen (focus) away from the Dem presidential selection brouhaha.
Perhaps she would have done as Bouie suggested (and with which I agree) to draw out the impeachment investigation were 2020 not a presidential election year. Sad!
1
Yes, the House Judiciary Committee did back far off from the Articles of Impeachment that could have been produced.
All legitimate Articles should have been included.
Given his unfitness for office, Trump should have the book thrown at him.
Using only two articles makes the House appear weak and unnecessarily lightens the case against Trump.
7
No, you are wrong. The American public has no stomach for 24/7 cable news news coverage of impeachment. In another era and environment, yes. Today, no. Impeachment was never meant to be a substitute for civil or criminal action in the courts. The more limited and disciplined the impeachment inquiry, the greater it's credibility-- at a time when credibility is essential. This is a matter of Congress doing its duty-- its about the judgment of history, not about swaying the electorate, grandstanding or self-righteousness. Whether others involved will pay for their wrongdoing is a question for another day.
2
No one will remember this when they go to vote in early November next year. Or rather, they will remember a nothingburger which Trump can continue to brand a hoax and a smear campaign. The Democrats have just handed Trump the biggest and the best Christmas present he could have wished for. With an impechment that has been voted on (and rejected) in the Senate, the findings will be completely useless on the campaign trail. A broader ongoing investigation - or an investigation where subpoenas to Pompeo, Bolton, Mulvaney etc had been contested in court (they refuse because they would otherwise be forced to lie to Congress to defend Trump) - would have given a Democrat presidential candidate a perfect bat to wield. Now all Trump's high crimes and demeanours (and they are legion) will be completely worthless, because the Sword of Damocles hanging over his head will be removed.
26
@Teo
Dems abandoned ship because John and Sue Q voter tuned this debacle out and don't care anymore. Parading Schiff around wasn't playing. Dems have had nearly four years to try to build the outrage case against Trump and it hasn't amounted to a hill of beans. I wouldn't feel that confident in another year or more doing the trick particularly with this cast of characters running the show.
it has been reported that Nadler had various disputes with Trump over real estate deals. How is his chairmanship NOT a conflict of interest?
2
@Gary
...the same way presidential-level emoluments are passé.
The impeachment proceedings have been riveting precisely because they have been so focused and purposeful. The Democrats made their points succinctly and convincingly. They nailed the high crimes committed over the Ukraine. Trump wrote his own second article with his blanket rejection of House subpoenas.
The story was well told, the facts are clear, and the Republicans have no answer to the Democrats' narrative.
Take the analogy of a boxer who has delivered a knockout punch to his opponent, and left him on the mat with no way to answer. Does the victor suggest that they come back in an hour and continue the fight for an unlimited number of rounds?
When you have proven your point beyond any doubt, don't give the opposition another shot at you.
2
What happened to the act of bribery. Isn’t this what the Ukraine phone call was all about. Even Pelosi called it bribery and this is explicitly stated in Constitution. Could have easily tacked on bribery and called it the day.
1
I disagree. If the Democrats were to investigate all of Trump's impeachable behaviour, the investigation would stretch well into Bernie's first term. It would also show an unhealthy degree of obsession, in my view.
Keep it businesslike, keep it quick, and move on to governing again. I don't think that anyone believes that these are the only things for which Trump could be impeached. Whatever the Senate chooses to do is their business.
3
I appreciate Jamelle's viewpoint but respectfully disagree. The two count get at the core of Trump's abuses in a manner that clearly clarifies his abuses in a manner easily digested by the public. Extending this process by engaging the topics mentioned in this column will cause a public exhausted with daily Trump drama to tune out and could backfire for the Democrats. Especially in our social media environment of constant distraction and short attention spans, sadly, we need something clear and simple to advance the most important objective of exposing Trump's violation of the Constiution. The pathetic Republicans who continue to ignore reality and defend Trump will then pay the price at the polls. We need to move this forward and fast.
3
I agree. Why is his blatant disregard for the emoluments restrictions being waved off this list?
4
Unless Ms. Pelosi plans to hold her powder until the Senate acquits Trump, after which she will impeach Trump again on other charges. Do not underestimate Ms. Pelosi. She got the Republicans all worked up over Ukraine and then pulled the rug and indicted Trump on other charges. A smart tactical move. I would not be surprised at how she plays political chess.
3
@Tom Can he be impeached more than once?
I do not understand how Speaker Pelosi and other Democrats think they can work with Trump when at the same time they are saying that he has obstructed Congress, and furthermore, has indicated very clearly that he is going to continue doing the same. What is their plan for the rest of 2020 after the servile Republicans in the Senate acquit him? Carry on as if everything is normal?
Trump has declared war, and the Democrats are caving in. This is a war that has been forced upon them, and they have no option but to fight as long as necessary.
Very disappointing.
The "radical" Republicans in 1868 tried to save what the Civil War was about, protection of citizenship rights for the freedmen. Their eleven impeachment articles included the kitchen sink and failed. More crimes, mean more lies, means more confusion in the public's eye. Republican Senators? If they reject the two articles Dems have written, would more change their minds?
If they were honest, Democrats would have just one article of impeachment.
1. We know we can’t beat President Trump in 2020 so we’re really really desperate.
4
@JQGALT Hmmm...Excuse my bluntness. What do trump followers know about honesty, civility, patriotism? He's a shill for Russia, gloats at his success dividing us and is dismantling our government while you who support him froth in blind support. Come on! An adulterer and molester supported by evangelicals? The only true deep state is trump, inc.!
Mr. Bouie is absolutely correct. As it stands now, impeachment is a total farce and a a waste of time. With the Senate bound not to convict, the only point of impeaching trump is to educate the public about all of the unethical and illegal things he has done. The two articles selected are too abstract to convince a large portion of the public that trump did anything that he wasn’t entitled to do as president. At least trump’s blatant disregard of the emoluments clause should be included. People CAN understand that.
The Democrats are proving once again that they can’t get it together. They don’t understand how to use power effectively. Republicans do!
4
There's too much to read here to be confident that the point hasn't already been made, but I'm inclined to agree with John Dean. He suggested passing the articles, but NOT sending them to the Senate for most or all of the year.
The points will have been made, the investigation can continue, and an illustrative light will be focused on Trump throughout the campaign.
I don't understand why Dean's take is not getting wider play.
2
And they should issue subpoenas to all the principals (Pompeo, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Bolton etc), and let their contests of them wend their way through the courts. To defend Trump they would have to lie in Congress, and we can be fairly certain a fair few of them would have baulked at doing so.
It’s so unbelievable they didn’t include an Emoluments clause Evaluation because Trump has committed this violation every day.
3
Though Mr. Bouie is not wrong, I thought the same at first, keep investigating him, keep adding charges.Trump’s record provides an arsenal of ammunition.
But, I have found that as a tactician and as a strategist, Speaker Pelosi has proven herself to be far sharper than I am, and find myself reluctant to question her judgment.
5
If Nancy did as you say, we'd be facing this issue four years from now and still without resolution. We are dealing with the world's worst law breaker, a mob boss, who deflects away and uses the court system to delay, delay, delay. We have already lost one congressman from working towards his re-election because this process has been so fraught.
Sadly, the whole process is likely to fail regardless of more proof of wrong doing. The folks who voted for Trump are not watching.
1
Two Articles of Impeachment may seem paltry in light of Trump's abuses of his office, but first we need to remove him from the presidency. Then we'll see.
1
I totally agree with Jamelle Bouie that we need to fully examine further potential articles of impeachment. Also, we should not be handing over control of the impeachment process to diabolical Mitch McConnell until the Democrats have done as much of their work as possible. Mitch will be a nightmare for the Democratic minority in the Senate, he will obstruct the process and justify whatever he does in terms of protocol without a hint of concession. Beware...
I also fully concur with David Leonhardt's opinion piece of 12/8 in which he urges that 8 outlined articles of impeachment be adopted.
Thank you both.
2
As a matter of political strategy, reasonable people can disagree about whether it is wiser to go with one article of impeachment or eight, or some number in between. Nobody knows how it will play out, and I doubt that many of us commenting here can much imagine what goes on in the minds of the 10 percent of Americans who are still undecided about voting to reelect Donald Trump.
But considering that there was never any chance that the Republican senate would vote to convict Trump, no matter what the crime and what the evidence, impeachment was always about the majority of the American people, through their representatives, saying "This is what we will not accept from our country's chief executive." And that list seems to me to constitute five items: 1) Subversion of free and fair elections 2) obstruction of congress 3) obstruction of justice 4) felony violations of campaign finance laws 5) violations of the emoluments clause.
Whatever happens in the 2020 election, I think it's a mistake not to lay each of those markers down clearly, as a matter of historical record and constitutional precedent.
3
It’s true that a complete list of impeachable charges against Trump would be longer than Tolstoy’s War and Peace. It is also true that the American public does not have the patience or desire to sift through War and Peace. Pelosi is correct in attempting to bring impeachment charges that can be absorbed by the majority of the population without too much difficulty. Impeachment is political and politics requires catering to the lowest common denominator. Besides, if we prioritize Trump’s crimes, I believe selling out our national security to rig an election would probably be at the top of the list anyway.
1
When prosecutors have a suspect with multiple charges, they typically pursue the ones with the strongest evidence.
Impeaching Trump just requires a single crime.
5
I disagree. It's getting way too close to primaries for the Dems to drag their feet. At this point, and I paraphrase here, it's time to either take action or get off of your fifteen flush commode. Obviously, there was a ton of stuff against Al Capone, but he was finally brought down with a charge of simple tax evasion. It's clear that more peripheral info will come out in the weeks and months ahead. This impeachment is clearly unwinnable in the Senate, but if the arguments against Trump are presented clearly, and in a timely manner, they may well be able to bring down the current President at the ballot box in less than eleven months.
4
There should certainly be a charge for violating the emoluments clause. While the legal case on this issue hasn't gone forward the congressional case can and should.
Also, the Mueller report laid out the case for obstruction of justice in the Russia investigation. Mueller obviously didn't what to be the special prosecutor who brought down a president. But he basically gave the evidence to congress.
But some of Trump's real crimes will never be the subject of impeachment because they have been conducted by Democrats and Republicans alike.
When Obama ordered a drone attack against an American citizen and later his son this was a clear violation of the due process clause.
When Obama and Trump ordered invasions of Libya and Syria respectively this clearly violated the constitutional requirement that only congress can declare war.
And while Trump has shown himself to be a congenital lier, who told bigger, more destructive lies than George Bush and Dick Cheney?
The American people have a lot of house cleaning to do. So let's start with Trump, but let's not hold only him to account.
7
The two articles proposed by House leadership are sufficient, because the issue is really quite simple. Democracy is on trial, even more than Mr. Trump. That has to be brought home to every Republican in Congress: That they are voting on whether the world’s oldest democracy wii continue to be one. Nothing more. Nothing less.
7
"the fact that AOC is less popular than Trump nationally"
AOC isn't running for president. She is, however, very popular in her district, and she does represent an important part of the populace. Don't forget that a true democracy includes everyone, even the minorities.
8
Jamelle - you are spot on. However, I believe there is a clever election angle to all this. Given that the servile GOP senate will most definitely refuse to remove him from office, the strategic intent would be to use the articles of impeachment as an election weapon against Trump. In that event, it helps to have a simple case that can be articulated very clearly to the electorate.
A more abundant portfolio of impeachment articles, while justifiable, will simply make the messaging more complicated.
Our goal is to impeach this guy, move on and then kick him out in the next election cycle. That way we check all the boxes. Lets do it.
6
Remember that meeting between Putin and Trump where everyone was kicked out except the translators, and I believe they were ordered to not take notes? I think the translators need to go into witness protection. And we need to know what was talked about.
8
I agree.
The question I have is what's going to happen from around January to election night when Trump has been impeached but there were not enough votes in the Senate to remove him?
Will we just be sitting around with our heads hung low and our mouths agape as Trump belittles us and thinks up new nicknames for the ones who tried to remove him?
If the impeachment proceedings are strung out, Trump will be essentially trapped, at least until it's over, and we could just keep dishing out more juicy crimes as lawyers and investigators continue to pore over Trump's daily doings.
I would only proceed quickly if I thought there was a good chance for his removal.
8
@Sirlar "...when Trump has been impeached but there were not enough votes in the Senate to remove him?"
You mean, he was indicted, but not convicted?
Good point-- "Democrats...can use the power of impeachment to set the terms of the next election — to shape the national political landscape in their favor."
And in the favor of the public interest.
Seems the moderates are deciding the pace and the shape of the impeachment of our criminal president.
The moderates also have been setting the limits of our lawmaking. They've abided by norms set by establishment centrists and wealthy mega donors who pay for our elections. That's why America is unique in still not having affordable health care for all -- generations behind other countries.
Our democracy stays within narrow limits.
There's still a lot to learn about the Trump's behavior.
And there's still a lot of progressive policy making Americans need and must demand for our public interest, health and well being.
Expand the investigation of Trump. Expand US policy making for the public benefit---long delayed.
5
@Meredith You present the U.S.-European political divide as if the rightward tilt of the American scale is deplorable. But the reverse case could be made, given how relatively unproductive and sclerotic much of government-heavy Europe is. Compare the amount of medical-device and pharmaceutical innovation that takes place here with that of any other nation with a centralized healthcare system.
American healthcare is the best in the world, as evidenced by the fact that it acts as the world's concierge healthcare system -- rich people, seeking the world's best care, travel here and pay full freight. The challenge is to ensure that we keep what's good about America's healthcare while fixing what's admittedly broken. Barack Obama was right: People don't (and shouldn't) want to start from scratch.
Moreover, why are the Scandinavian countries held up as models for their generous government benefits rather than for their free markets, which are often less burdened by regulations than ours? Shouldn't the liberal/Left crowd, to be consistent, be asking for more market freedom AND more benefits? The focus on the second rather than the first gives the game away.
Also, you seem to think that if anyone disagrees with your claims about this or that thing being in the "public interest" (whatever that means), then the simple reason they're doing so is because they're shills for the moneyed class. Free great stuff is nearly nonexistent. Chasing fantasies is a recipe for disappointment.
It seems safe to assume that the Senate will not convict Trump on any impeachment charges from the House. These are dangerous times but there is no check on Trump. The founders never envisioned that a large percentage of Congress would have no interest in pursuing truth in an impeachment process and thereby totally ignore their constitution duty. But that is the situation with the Republican Party. Given the context, the Democrats are probably correct in limiting the charges to only two that easy to understand.
2
@Bob "The founders never envisioned that a large percentage of Congress would have no interest in pursuing truth in an impeachment process and thereby totally ignore their constitution duty."
Has anyone considered, if a large percentage of people are wrong, that the rest of the country is right?
Sometimes, I am so right, I can't believe anyone else could disagree. It happens.
1
Someone once said, “You can have your own opinion, but you can’t have your own facts!”
The fact is that Trump withheld Congressionally approved taxpayer money for military aid to an ally currently under attack by Putin’s Russia, conditioning the release of the money on the announcement of an investigation of his political rival and accepting blame for meddling in the 2016 election.
A further fact is that he has not released a single one of the 71 documents subpoenaed by the various House oversight committees, despite the fact that Article One of the Constitution gives the power of Impeachment solely to the House of Representing and he is thereby defying the Constitution.
Whatever your opinion about Donald Trump, those are the facts.
Jamelle Bouie is ignoring, or perhaps unaware of, a basic aspect of political argumentation, namely: A position is only a strong as its weakest supporting argument. This is the opposite of legal argumentation, where a shotgun approach can work because the courts must give consideration to all arguments that are presented.
So I agree with Pelosi's approach: if you have a single strong argument, don't try to reinforce it with other arguments, particularly in a situation where the opposition will do all they can to obstruct you.
3
You’re correct. If they’re going this narrow route why bother trying to compel witness testimony or production of records.
1
Only one article is needed: Obstruction. Trump has not only obstructed Congress, but has done so mocking it at the same time. Curiously, he's also enabled by Republican members of Congress, and it's unfortunate we cannot attach them to the impeachment process.
3
I do not understand the logic of why restricting the number of impeachable charges will help members of Congress in purple districts. Wouldn't a better case for impeachment be made if all of Trump's crimes are fully aired?
1
All it takes is one that passes. But we all know that the GOP controlled Senate will not convict him, even if he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue on live TV. So the exercise is to make a clean case that can then be taken to the voters: here's what your Senator voted for as acceptable conduct. I hate this logic, but it is what it is. 408 days to go.
8
I PLACE The correct number of articles of impeachment at 9 or 10. Still, I agree with the strategy of Pelosi and Nadler to bring these two articles immediately. Where is it written that Congress may not increase the number of articles of impeachment, if found to be necessary. Trump was able to get the public to believe that the findings in Mueller's report, which he is incapable of reading himself, were false. The two current articles of impeachment are constructed so as to not be subject to being picked apart or denied. There is a great deal of holiday activity between now and the end of the year. It's a great time for volunteers to place themselves at the malls to get people to sign up to vote. Especially the youth. They hold their future in their hands: only 1 in 5 of the youngest voters cast their ballots in the last presidential election, according to Obama. Meaning that the young people can play a powerful role in shaping their own future. Trump does not believe in global climate change. The next generation will be subject to ever more severe ravages like floods, wildfires, drought, famine and poisoning of the water and the air. Yes, young voters! You hold your fate in your own hands. You can ignore your duty to vote and let Trump prevail. Or become politically active. Your lives may depend on fighting global climate change NOW! One legacy we seniors can leave is getting the youth vote to the polls so they can exert their power over their own future.
2
Bouie's arguments are extremely persuasive and absolutely correct as to the advantage that the Democrats possess in extending their impeachment investigations well into 2020. It is a political gift that will save the nation. And as much as I respect and like Speaker Pelosi, she reflects a long-standing tradition among Democratic Party leadership and their politicians, to respond to outrageous political partisanship from the GOP by attempting to rise above the fray. And what has it brought them? Trump and the incredibly corrupt takeover of all the reigns of political power, save a tenuous hold on the House for which they will now, once again, cave into the craven. Too sad.
2
Whatever has the best possibility of success in removing Trump quickly is what should be done. Today the Russian foreign minister was back in the White House, reminding us of the last time he was there when Trump spilled classified information, causing the removal of our best source of information in the Kremlin. Trump still has access to classified information as do several in his circle who could not get normal security clearance. That's only one of the reasons why he must be removed as soon as possible. I hope Mrs. Pelosi has chosen the best course.
3
Impeachment does not have to end with these two articles. As new information unfolds, the House can initiate another round and file more articles. Likewise, Pence was part of the Ukraine scheme and separate articles can be filed against him. Of course, republicans will spin this as a witch hunt and stretch "reasonable doubt" to exonerate Trump.
Nevertheless, the sheer volume of high crimes and misdemeanors should be enough to remove Trump & Pence via the 2020 election.
I pray every day for my country, that our precious democracy will survive this debacle.
8
Nancy Pelosi knows what she's doing. Dragging out the inquiry would achieve nothing, except to make the more zealous members of her party feel good and might actually be counter-productive. We should remember that not all the electorate are Democrats and Trump cannot be removed without the votes of others.
3
Emoluments is the one issue everybody can understand and support. Go for it, PLEASE!
11
Democrats became a failed party under the delusion that they might serve two masters at once, big-money and the working class, and preserve a public illusion of moral purity.
As Republicans became ever more extreme and despicable, Democrats found it easy to sound to appear noble.
A laundry list of Republican abuses of power on every front is treated by Democrats as politically acceptable ’collateral damage’.
Not to mention the storm of Republican abuses of common sense and rationality, and their utter perversion of the national dialog.
It was only when one of their own was targeted that they finally accepted the onus to impeach, a process they would not have begun otherwise.
Just get Biden into the presidency and everything can return to a fractured normalcy that might be explained away with a lot of carefully managed media appearances.
To impeach the president on every charge available is to invite an investigation into their own collusion with compromise in the service of money.
Democrats decline the necessary fight because the fight is for the soul of our nation, and when that fight is taken up it forces the challengers to look into their own souls and experience a reckoning and a clear understanding of themselves.
Democrats want to get it over quickly so they can manage how they appear before 'moderates'?
The fight for the soul of our nation?
That’s all the example you need to see Democrats for what they are, players, a banal lesser of two evils, not leaders.
2
The problem with "take its own sweet time" is it's already starting to ferment. Repeat any word or phrase a million times and it begins to sound like gibberish. Trump/Ukraine/Favor has been discussed to ad nauseam. Also remember what happens to the "native hue of resolution" it gets "its currents turned away".
Madam Pelosi has safely guided this ship into the harbor through stormy seas, and I salute her for her accomplishment.
2
This is an accurate assessment of the current situation. The only thing I would add to it is this - If the Democrats are so sure that an impeachable offense has occurred, why don’t they complete the full investigations including properly adjudicating the subpoenas and getting proper and complete testimony? Since the articles of impeachment so far presented are not evidence enough of high crimes and misdemeanors then the only conclusion is that the Democrats don’t believe there will be enough evidence if the pursue the full investigation. They figure this is their best chance even though it won’t get past the house and will ultimately fail in the Senate. So their best chance at present is no removal of the president and this is really just admittance of failure.
On the one hand, Pelosi seems to be proceeding carefully and thoughtfully. On the other, I have thought that a Senate trial that is conducted the same way could give great exposure to Democratic senators running for president, even if it means they have to spend more time in Washington and less in the states. There’s also the consideration that a rush to judgment in a matter of this magnitude is a bad idea. Yes, Virginia, there is still (just barely) due process, and even Donald Trump (who I hope will soon be the former president) has the right to receive due process.
I totally agree with you. In trying to "protect" their members from swing districts, they are failing to lay out as strong a case as they could to impeach Trump. So what if it takes longer? The election isn't until November. They should at least include obstruction of justice, evident in the Mueller investigation.
1
Continuing the investigation would continue the crucial act of educating the public. Pursuing the blatant Emoluments Clause violations would help bring the crucial financial information, i.e. tax returns, bank statements, to light. Even his Republican enablers would not be able to run from that evidence.
4
The “Obstruction of Congress” charge will make impeachment a routine event.
Next time there’s a Democrat President and Republican House, this will be the go-to play.
The House will issue hundreds of subpoenas and any attempt to fight them in court will be grounds for immediate impeachment.
4
The difference between the Ukraine issue and any others is that the whistle blower laid out the road map and civil servants confirmed most of it. Investigating anything else would have no real starting point and, as we've seen, Trump would just refuse to cooperate, making it difficult to come up with reliable evidence.
It's true that a Senate trial will almost certainly be treated by Republicans as a propaganda exercise but the Senate will never find him guilty anyway. Better to get it out of the way now, when voters aren't paying too much attention. The closer to the election it happens, the more dangerous it becomes.
Agreed with Bouie, but not for quite the same reasons. I think Pelosi is seriously misreading the electorate.
One of the main contributors to the Clinton loss was a widespread feeling among loyal Democrats, and swing-voting independents, that the Democratic leadership was perpetually dropping the ball on matters that most affected people's lives.
A bellwether was the Obama administration's fear and kid-glove handling of powerful mal-actors during the financial crisis, while doing nothing of significance to help those most harmed by the malfeasance - homeowners forced into foreclosure, the millions who lost decent jobs and never recovered, the tens of thousands of small businesses that were forced to shutter.
The disgust at this double standard, where the rich and powerful were coddled with state welfare, while ordinary people could barely afford legal representation, if any at all, and had no recourse but to accept predation from the top, fueled a backlash against the Democratic leadership, embodied by Clinton.
Without a powerful show from Dem leadership drawing a clear line in the sand that this President's behavior is unacceptable, and fighting tooth and nail against the rich and powerful's view that they are above the rules (correctly reading the Dem's inevitable fecklessness), the Dems will just amplify impressions that they are incapable and inept, sowing the seeds of their own demise.
The Dems, in short, must do more.
2
Pelosi impeached Trump when he attacked one of her own, Joe Biden. Trump’s most egregious abuses of power and violation of the public trust are his racist statements and policies, separating families and caging children at the border and inciting and being cited by white nationalist mass murders; and climate change denialism, reversing environmental policies and threatening the future of civilization. Pelosi and the Democratic leadership never considered impeaching Trump on issues Americans care about, because they want to fight Trump on narrow legal technicalities they can control.
When Trump inevitably wins in the Senate, he will claim exoneration and see the House Democratic majority used its nuclear option, but he crushed them. If Trump ignores Congress, implementing his program through National Emergency and Executive Orders, the House Democrats are to blame for rendering themselves a debate society with no influence over the people or ability to stop Trump from establishing one-man-rule.
1
My only consolation will be that Trump can be brought to justice once his presidency is over. Mueller preserved a lot of evidence for such a scenario.
2
This is exactly the argument that I made yesterday and will be calling my Democratic congressmen. It is insane to turn this matter over to Mitch McConnell so that he can destroy Joe Biden over whatever period he wishes, and yet that is what the Democrats are planning to do. They want to just get it over with but Mitch need not start the hearings until a month before the election. Or he may run an anti Biden or even Anti Hillary investigation that will go for the full year. Oh, but he is too fair to do such a thing?
1
Speaker Pelosi's restraint and focus are strategic, and brilliantly so.
Since the Senate won't convict Trump, inflict maximum political damage on him through speed, sharp message focus and repetition.
A protracted process favors Trump - allows more time for shading, gaslighting, obfuscation.
The essence - critical aid witheld . . . to solicit Ukraine's help in damaging a political rival . . . for personal political gain. Both so wrong and so simple my 12-year-old understands it.
Stay singular with the message, and repeat, repeat, repeat!
1
@NorCal Patriot
"Since the Senate won't convict Trump, inflict maximum political damage on him through speed, sharp message focus and repetition."
Maximum political damage in a hurried impeachment that doesn't even mention Russia? 2 Articles? 5 would seem a minimum. The Dems have blown it, I just can't figure out why.
1
The aggressive focused impeachment strategy is refreshingly un-Democratic, and realistic. Its pace has left Trump’s usual news-cycle control lagging. Its focus on the Ukraine extortion says, “An act of this magnitude is singularly criminal—seeking to fix an election!” And it leaves Republican Senate and Congressional candidates exposed when the election happens, and they have blithely failed to impeach—with no cover of Democrats overreaching.
6
No. I totally disagree. The Obstruction of Congress charge is indisputable, it is certainly grounds for impeachment, and it puts the opponents of impeachment in a bind. If they deny that article, they are opting for a dictatorship. This is a crystal clear choice between defending our Constitution and attacking it. There is no need for more articles.
9
Pelosi is cutting her losses. She didn't want impeachment to begin with, and she recognizes that the theatrics have not resulted in Senate Republicans condemning Trump. There is considerable doubt about whether any of the current candidates can beat Trump in 2020, noted even in this newspaper. By finally passing the USMCA she can at least claim that her House did something important since 2018. I hope she will now turn to other subjects even more important, such as rational gun control measures, infrastructure rebuilding, a path for DACA members to achieve citizenship, climate control, and other measures that could be passed if moderate approaches are used and drafted by members from both sides of the aisle. That would be a breath of fresh air and give the Democrats some victories while avoiding being tarnished with the brush of partisanship that many Americans paint both GOP and Democrats with.
@Locals4Me
Let's be fair and clear: the House of Representatives has passed hundreds of bills, that Mitch McConnell has let wither on his desk, and not brought any up for discussion to the Senate floor which he controls. There's no equivalence, the fault of Congressional paralysis lies on the Republicans.
3
@ Marc Castle You make a valid point. McConnell has paralyzed the Senate by blocking over 500 pieces of legislation passed in the House. See Philip Bump’s article in the Washington Post, 12/5/2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/05/all-trumps-complaints-house-is-doing-more-legislative-work-than-senate/
A long examination of all Trump offenses with supporting witnesses (that would make it very long and time consuming) is clearly not congruent with the interest level in this matter by the American people. Bouie's point is thoughtful but not at all realistic. Pelosi's reading of what the public will tolerate is more accurate.
1
IIf we're going down the "nowhere near enough rabbit hole," the most important reason for impeaching Trump wasn't mentioned here or by Leonhardt - A Crime against Humanity for refusing to confront climate change.
2
Sir, there is NO limit on the Number Of Times a “ President “ can BE Impeached. Do you get where I’m going with that statement ? We can have an Impeachment every Month, if necessary, as long as HE occupies the Oval Office.
Don’t doubt Madame Speaker, SHE’S GOT THIS.
Seriously.
8
I am in agreement with Jamelle Bouie here, and reiterate that the longer the impeachment process "drags" on, the greater the weight of all of it on Trump and his toadies will be.
As far as I'm concerned, the longer the list of Articles of Impeachment could have been, the better. And I do think they should have been composed with great deliberation, not necessarily this truncated documentation, and they did not have to be done by Christmas. In fact, I think it would have been better fully presented after the holidays--people are rather distracted right now.
Besides, if this is slow-walked, every 'i' dotted and 't' crossed carefully, the whole sordid mess is kept in front of the American public longer, and that can't be good for Trump's image of that of his cronies.
One does this not in an attempt to turn the minds of the Trump cultists--nothing will do that anyway--but to persuade the few persuadebles left, and, of course, for the historical record. And, it's quite possible if the pressure is kept on, there will be even more revelations--one certainly can't think that the entire list of depredations has yet been revealed--and not only may this cause some of the Republicans to break ranks, it may force Trump and his coterie into even more errors.
Even if the Senate declines to eventually convict (as is likely), all this can't possibly good for Trump's re-election chances, or those of his Congressional enablers. But it needs to be kept in front of the public.
2
Too many progressives underestimate the levels of ignorance and outright stupidity in this country.
We are not an enlightened people right now. We have one of the two governing political parties in the full throes of dictatorship and totalitarianism based on religious and ethnic identity.
The normal rules don’t apply. If the right can spin it, they win. Don’t give them opportunities to spin.
8
Perhaps the saving grace is that "abuse of power" covers a multitude of sins. A very large multitude.
1
Knowing that a president can be impeached more than once, I consult my crystal ball, which tells the House to impeach along party lines, and tells the Senate to acquit along party lines. With the House voting to impeach, Trump will now wear the mark of the beast up to and beyond the election on November 3, 2020. In my crystal ball, I see Robert De Niro flipping the "I'm watching you" sign at Donald Trump.
3
Our democracy is already nearly finished. The Crazies have won. The outcomes of elections are a foregone conclusion. There is a pre-determined outcome for impeachment: With help from the Democrats, Trump survives a trial in the Senate, declares vindication and goes on to win re-election. After that, the final dismantling of our system will be completed. Putin wins!
4
@Marc
And we will live in tyranny like three-fifths of the world does now. We are not immune to the same tribal instincts as any other
2
Those two allegations of the article of impeachment against President Trump are all encompassing. If this were a law test, I would have flunked because I see extortion in the evidence above everything else.
But President Volodymyr Zelensky is a willing victim in the extortion case or charge. You cannot go anywhere with that in a court of law, even in a Senate impeachment hearing.
If this were a criminal court with a prosecutor or deputy district attorney prosecuting the case, with Donald Trump as the accused, then yes, every single charge should have been uttered and iterated into a set of charges, at the time of arraignment.
But the madness, the sheer cacophony and bitter weirdness of the Republicans during the most recent of the last pre-impeachment hearing, served to remind everyone just how loony the other side is going to be during the trial.
Two allegations, two charges, two articles of impeachment only.
Those allegations will lay a ground of facts from which Mr. Trump cannot ascend.
1
When the House votes to impeach, does that immediately trigger a Senate trial, or can the House delay seizing the Senate?
One Democratic heavy weight suggested the House, having voted to impeach the president, hold off passing the baton to the Senate. Such a delay would presumably leave the president "impeached" and not yet "acquitted," as a way to find further evidence of culpability and build public support.
I'm not sure I agree with that tactic, so, for now, I'll hew to the Speaker's lead.
You only need to convict a president on one. The penalty is the same whether you convict on 1 or a hundred articles. Removal and disqualification. In focusing on the most likely way (which is very unlikely) to convict him, less is more and the KISS principle applies.
5
If the purpose of impeachment were the truth, rather than politics, this would be a convincing argument. But it isn't.
1
I think Robert Reich's recent argument in favour of multiple articles of impeachment is pertinent - you cannot be pardoned for any offenses you have been impeached for.
1
Focus Focus Focus a straight punch in the solar plexus is better than a flurry of smacks. A clearly made case is the only way to counter the used car salesmen of obfuscation the republicans have become.
2
These added articles and many more, we hope.
Fundamentally, the charges are breaking the law. It is a matter of upholding laws even when pubic opinion has not caught up to the fundamental dangers of a lawless president and lawless government.
A lawless government is created by lawless people: those holding office and those who voted them into office.
A nation of lawlessness invites the necessity for imposing tyranny. And that is exactly where things are heading if not stopped now.
To do less than oppose in the broadest and strongest terms is to not only to defend the Constitution and democracy, but to avert, subvert and abort future tyranny!
1
I whole heartily agree! There is plenty more that can be investigated, has been investigated, and must be investigated that would add to the already impeachable offenses. I too wonder just why it needs to be done so quickly knowing that there is much more. I just hope that tRUMP’s improprieties come under the microscope. I worry what the future of our country will be if there is another four years of this maniacal administration along with those enablers of his.
1
IMO, the reason they are restricting the impeachment to two articles is that so many of them have dirty hands, e.g. using their office to enrich themselves.
4
What really depresses me and makes me want to just skip to the crossword puzzle every day is that right and wrong make absolutely no difference in this. It doesn’t matter whether Trump did nothing wrong or was caught on tape offering Putin Alaska back in exchange for help winning next year; he will be impeached in the House and acquitted in the Senate, and the people who watch Fox News will think it’s a witch hunt, and the rest of us will think he makes Nixon look saintly. Certainly Trump has done a lot to drag us all down into the muck, but I fear that we had already been headed in that direction.
1
Absolutely!
Many more articles of impeachment should be drawn up against Trump (see David Leonhardt's 12/8 opinion piece, "The Eight Counts of Impeachment That Trump Deserves")
His misdeeds - all of them - need to be included. His lies are so pervasive, his behavior so constantly outrageous that we've become inured to his transgressions. His followers have always been blind to them. They need to be awakened from their Trump Trance with a hefty dose of the facts brought out on the public stage.
1
Unfortunately the whole impeachment investigation and crafting of articles of impeachment has been done under the lingering pall of the disastrous Mueller investigation. I have not read the entire Mueller report but I have read enough to know that trump was not exonerated and that there is lots of evidence of wrong doing: obstruction and help from Russia, although collusion could not be found to have occurred among the many bumbling, trump supporting boxes. But Mueller in his overly careful wording and then frankly dissembling performance basically handed the ball to the liar in chief and his sycophant attorney general to spread a false narrative and erect the smoke and mirrors. The whole thing was confusing, damaging, hard to follow even by people who tried, and gave cover to trump sand profoundly demoralized the sane people. So Pelosi is right to steer a quick impeachment process that is simple enough in its message to make the attempts at Republican twisting of the truth easier to see.
1
Great article if anyone really cared, which they don't. It's a smart move by Pelossi to limit 2. She can't win but she can say she did her job etc....
Now the GOP is going to hammer this one to death and guess who loses? They can drag this on and make everyone that voted for impeachment a vote against democracy or whatever. Biden and son will be dragged through this and Joe is not fast on his feet and he will lose it for sure...
Republicans are now in control of a bad situation. Stay tuned as they ratchet up the heat..
I agree with you except for the statement that Republicans control a bad situation. Republicans just deny, deny, confuse, obstruct, etc. Their behavior is not what is expected of lawmakers in a representative democracy. This is not how our system is designed to work. So I'm afraid we are watching our system of government with its three coequal branches and their checks and balances coming to the end. It is one party that is destroying our political system. I never thought America would come to this.
Abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are enough charges. This president has committed so many high crimes and misdemeanors that it would take 10 years to investigate them all fully. Even Evangelicals admit that the president is an outlaw.
Impeach Trump now and let the GOP senators take responsibility for keeping a Russia-loving criminal in the Oval Office. This all started with the voters years ago. Let's see if they want to correct their mistake next November.
2
"They can show the country what Trump has done with his power, and why he shouldn’t be allowed to wield it any longer."
Sadly, with trump administration stonewalling under the banner of executive privilege it will be hard to show additional acts of wrongdoing conclusively.
Even if someone on the inside, closer to trump than the brave witnesses who testified, were to speak or release documents, which they probably signed off on never releasing, the Republican backlash would include tarnishing that person, ridiculing that person, threatening that person.
We live in nasty times, we do.
Impeachment had to be started, and trump may win the day through his stonewalling, the lack of true patriots risking the abuse that would come from revealing the inside conclusive dirt about this scoundrel, and of course rich Mitch in the Senate.
Blah, blah, blah. Everybody's an expert on the internet. If Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler want to go with two articles of impeachment, then that's enough.
2
Beware of a liberal scorned like the petty Mr. Bouie. You leftists are demonstrating how utterly radical and tyrannical you become when someone threatens to slaughter your golden calf and dismantles piece-by-piece all of your pseudo-moral sacred beliefs. The realization that Americans dislike the terrible, hateful and bigoted ideas and identity politics of your party might help you to come center. But instead you want to usurp power by a nefarious means. Shame on each of you. Shame. Shame. Shame.
1
Huh? Is this an attempt at humor? Could a person possibly be unaware that America’s authoritarian party, the Republicans, is and has been milking identity politics for all it’s worth? Could a person possibly not see that Trump is the golden calf of America’s right wing movement?
3
The guy in the White House just gave the Dems a big middle finger by inviting to a closed session in the White House a Russian intelligence agent. And, once again allowing only the Russian propaganda organs to cover the event.
The actions of that man to endanger our country can never be exposed enough. The Congress must do its duty to impeach and remove him from the White House. He stinks up the peoples house. The house where we have built for legitimate presidents. And now it is being sullied by a traitor.
The Dems need to include traitorous actions in the impeachment articles.
2
I agree fully with the article. Cowardly dems doing their cowardly thing while the world burns, typical.
The goal was never about removing Trump from office, because fox news runs the GOP and they would never allow it to happen. But impeachment is VERY significant in regards to history and properly calling out the president on his litany of crimes, failures, lies, and incompetence in an official capacity.
They squandered a huge opportunity. Doesn't surprise me in the least. This is the same party that gives a ridiculous and unearned amount of support for idiots like Buttigieg (obama 2.0, and in the worst possible way) instead of.....almost another candidate who would do far better (save Williamson and Gabbard).
1
The NYT will not be popular with this story. Liberals hate the truth.
1
What Bouie writes here makes a lot of sense—but only in a world where facts and truth and decency matter. We no longer live in that sort of world, so, as unsatisfying as those two articles of impeachment are, I figure that Nancy Pelosi has a better sense of what to do in this crazy political environment than I do. The GOP knows that it can get away with saying anything at all—including saying (as Rick Perry did) that Trump is God’s chosen president. If that does not reduce Trump supporters to laughter, it does not matter how long the Democrats investigate. No battle lines will change.
368
@Mik
I agree with your assessment.
This investigation could go on for ten more months and the Dems could add twenty more articles of impeachment - and Republicans would still say Trump did nothing wrong and vote the party line.
27
@Mike
I do not believe we live in a world where facts and truth and decency do not matter. Those that succumb to such dystopian thoughts are victims, like those that live in an abusive relationship who blame themselves for their abuse. The GOP does think it can get away with saying anything ... we need not encourage them by stating that it is true.
19
@Mike
Actually what matters most now is securing the validity of the voting machines in ever state, especially the key electoral states that inexplicably went Trump's way last election.
Remember Ivanka Trump got China to approve a trademark to manufacture voting machines in November of 2018.
12
I agree, but it looks like your approach will not happen. The oversight ability of the House does not have to end with the vote in the Senate. Your reasons illustrated do not go away nor should the responsibility of the house.
Trump will be impeached. House investigations will continue. Obstruction of Congress will continue. More wrongdoing will come to light. Trump could become the first president to be impeached twice.
I absolutely agree. If there were no impeachment, you could conclude the Dems decided to pass on the whole business. Instead, they are strongly implying these are the only two impeachable offenses Trump has committed.
But: Obstruction of the original Russia investigation, abetting Russia in spreading disinformation about the 2016 election, nepotism, his kids laying the groundwork for Trump Organization real estate and other business deals abroad, old-fashioned transfer of government money to his own pocket every time the U.S. rents rooms as Mar-a-Lago. Intimidating witnesses, etc.
Trump is not getting removed from office anyway. This exercise is for the historical record, to spell out core principles of government, to deter wrongdoing by future Presidents. The House is failing the country by putting forward such narrow articles of impeachment.
240
@Jake Roberts
I respectfully disagree. David Gergen is right, Trump is "a walking case of obstruction". The question is how to decide what to hold him accountable for and to cut through all the media noise. How? Focus on the absolutely essential and eliminate the merely desirable. The one obstruction case is not an instance but a pattern. The pattern is primary, the instances, secondary. Adding more is window dressing. This is the main attraction.
4
@MGP
I respectfully disagree with MGP. One incident does not a pattern make. Merriam-Webster defines a pattern as "frequent or widespread incidence." This approach of having just one article of impeachment for his obstruction completely minimizes what he has done (and is currently doing), which lends itself readily to the argument that his obstruction was no big deal.
6
@Jake Roberts
As Obama stated "do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good" . These Articles of Impeachment are the good.
5
"There’s no reason for Democrats to end things now."
Completely incorrect. Liberals have this really bad tendency to act like they are winning when they are not.
Polls are indicating that public support of impeachment is declining and has been for weeks. If this downward trend were to continue it would start becoming an advantage for Trump. Moderates (who Dems need to win 2020) have already lost much of their interest in impeachment. There's virtually nothing in the polls that would support a strategy of prolonging the impeachment, which won't get through the Senate anyway.
I'm glad that Pelosi is not worried what elites on the left want because they have no idea how the democratic party should present itself when it comes to appealing to voters. These same people were spiking the football for Clinton before a vote was cast last time because they couldn't fathom how Trump might appeal to voters.
"The Squad" is popular among the elites because they always do what is easy which is fill the air with their self serving sanctimony which I'm sure is a hit on Twitter. What never seems to penetrate that bubble is the fact that AOC is less popular than Trump nationally. So while the elites and the Squad are being unhelpful, the adults of the Democratic party actually have to hatch a viable strategy that wins elections.
Nancy Pelosi has been brilliant in all of this and my respect for her has gone up a lot in the last month. Stay the course.
133
@Tom
Very little of this is actually true, though. Polls asking whether Trump should be impeached have been pretty steady since the inquiry was announced. Adding more articles also gives vulnerable House members more wiggle room to oppose some while voting for others.
Pelosi was essentially backed into a corner that forced her into an impeachment, at a point when the timing is very, very bad. About half of the Democratic candidates for president who stand any meaningful chance in the primaries will be prevented from campaigning for at least a few weeks because they are senators who need to be present for the trial.
She should have started House impeachment proceedings months ago on the obstruction portion of the Mueller report. This would have given much more time for cases to work their ways through the courts, and arguably would have prevented the Ukraine scandal from happening at all.
34
@gh
Interesting take. But it's wrong.
American's supporting impeachment was in the low 40's throughout the year, with dips into the 30's after the Mueller testimony was a let down (which is why Pelosi correctly declined to pursue impeachment at the time) and peaks after the Ukraine story blew up in October, just cracking 50%. That didn't last long. Now it's sitting in the mid 40's. If you think such drops are insignificant then you don't know what game is being playing here. It's very clear that the polling is trending the wrong way for impeachment. The longer they carry on with it they risk it becoming a political asset for Trump.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/
Pelosi was correct not to pursue impeachment after the Mueller report was a dud. Support was low. She was correct again to proceed when the Ukraine story started up at the end of September. She didn't pick the timing here, she only responded to the events as they happened. Ukraine has tons of evidence and eye witness testimony. The Russia case has far more ambiguity. The overwhelming evidence is what made her proceed with impeachment at this point, not pressure from anyone in the party.
Also, this idea that Senators running for office feel put out by a Senate impeachment hearing for their election opponent is a joke. They're licking their chops. I guarantee you that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are excited by that opportunity.
6
@Tom As evidenced by the number of democrats win the governor seat in red states, Trump support is waning.
13
I completely agree. I hope Dems read this and recognize the clear and obvious virtue of this approach.
Trump's power since the beginning of his campaign has been his ability to control the narrative by doing / saying / tweeting outrageous things. Even when they are just crude comments without policy ramifications, he's given coverage, which always extends to the "issues" that he chooses to say stupid things about.
The democrats must dominate the headlines, and this is best accomplished by continuing investigations and demanding additional documents and testimony.
I don't think the impeachment inquiry needs to look into everything you suggest - it's crucial to avoid the appearance of a "fishing exhibition." But there is so much more we could learn about this particular scandal - we know what the President knew and when he knew it, but we need far more details about Gulliani's dealings, Russia's role, Barr's role, Bolton's observations, and how Nunes was involved, among other things.
The two-article impeachment is a serious mistake, for all the reasons you say. We need to keep on the offensive or Trump's offensive lies will continue to dominate the conversation.
129
Agree in full. But the current Articles are already sufficient.
Your point is that there is plenty of constitutional reason to continue investigating Trump, and many more Articles to bring forward. (And that it would be politically wiser as well.)
It is that last part that Speaker Pelosi is wanting to avoid any whiff of. She is striving to stay assiduously by the book (Constitution), and not be partisan. While that is deeply admirable, the facts on the ground are that the Republicans are monolithically partisan, and that to save our democracy, it wouldn't hurt to take the political realities into consideration just a little. In fact, she already had earlier, when after Mueller's testimony, she was not willing to go forward with Impeachment, reasoning that it was not politically feasible, and could have a negative outcome. So I agree it would be best to continue investigating further, and deeper... for example, fight in the courts to demand that Executive Branch witnesses such as Pompeo come forward under oath. For Nixon, it took 2 years to turn the tide. The same is needed here... right up to election 2020.
88
@PT "politically feasable" as a strategy is abdication to evil.
1
@PT
Yes it took 2 years for Nixon to admit defeat and resign but that was 1972. Nowadays 4 years may not be enough (and in the case of the present Senate hell will need to freeze over first).
1
I'm sorry but you are wrong and Nancy Pelosi is right. You say "Pelosi wants to get to the bottom of the president’s wrongdoing and she wants to protect her moderate members." Undoubtedly she does but she also does not want a long drawn out process that the low information, short attention span voter will eventually tune out of and move on. She also knows hat to accomplish what you have suggested would involve months if not years tied up in the court system. The election is now less than 12 months away. Take comfort in the fact that trump will have many more scandals between now and next November.
117
@Steve This is was Schiff's defence, today--that more investigations and waiting for the courts to force witnesses to testify would take months, and let Trump continue to commit crimes. But he is clearly, obviously not trying very hard--Mueller has already delivered a report outlining around 10 instances of obstruction of justice. And what is wrong with the investigations going on while the election approaches? What is wrong with Trump continuing to try to obstruct justice as new evidence is sorted out? The Republicans will call the ongoing investigations a political stunt? Let them say that. And let the new evidence be exposed every night on the news. During the debates, let Trump answer questions about why he is telling witnesses not to testify and why he is being impeached. We don't need a pretty little impeachment that gets tied up with a bow and set aside so that we can have a nice, simple election. We're fighting criminals. To charge them a minimal number of crimes makes no sense. It's cowardly and astonishingly foolish.
23
The low information voter is already tuned out. They are Trump’s base.
13
@Smilodon7o
They are not Trump's only base -- the low information voter; there are plenty of middle class and rich folk who voted for Trump-including college educated women.
Hillary ran an awf7l campaign but the Dems are so muddled... Maybe Bloomberg wants Trump to win. Maybe many a male Democrat candidate would rather see Trump as president than Warren.
5
I understand Bouie's thinking here but the key factor is the willingness of moderate Democrats to back the impeachment push. No doubt they have made clear to Pelosi that they will not continue to back an impeachment process that is dragged out well into 2020. They have good reason - in many of their districts the president remains fairly popular and impeachment hurts them. Their re-election - and the Democrats ability to retain control of the House - depends on changing the conversation to other issues.
There's nothing to say that the Democrats can't continue to use House control to investigate the issues Bouie raises here. If anything truly shocking comes to light, it could support a second impeachment effort against Trump, though it's unlikely.
70
@Edward Swing -- The case for obstruction of Mueller's investigation is already set forth in great detail in Mueller's report. It required no further work by Democrats and it's assertion as an article of impeachment would have occasioned no further delay. It was truly shocking, to use your words, and Mueller already shined a very bright light on it. It's omission from the articles of impeachment calls into serious question Pelosi's competence.
18
@RunDog And the House moderates made it clear that they didn't want to impeach based on that. You can keep ignoring the political realities of the situation - no doubt Democrats will keep their political control of Los Angeles either way - but don't expect congressional Democrats representing much more moderate districts to do so as well.
Most of us are frustrated by the challenges to properly holding Trump to account, but at the end of the day Democrats are better off narrowing the scope of the charges so that they can present a united front.
5
@Edward Swing -- The House moderates are wrong. What's the old expression: In for a penny, in for a pound? If the moderates have re-election concerns, they are triggered by any impeachment, regardless of scope. In any event, limiting the impeachment based on such political considerations falls right into Republican arguments that the entire exercise is more about politics than such grandiose concerns as the Constitution. Democrats simply need to do the right thing. They are not. I'm glad to be an independent, not a Democrat, because they are so, so inept.
17
The Democrats have chosen the high road with the minimalist approach to achievement. This supports Pelosi's contention she was forced into it. The articles do reference back to the Mueller report, but that looks like all we're going to get. Still nothing stops the Democrats from continuing their oversight. And favorable court rulings will undoubtedly deliver some slow investigative progress. At this point, the Dems would be wise to hold off on the relentless anti-Trump posture until after the sham exoneration in the Senate.
BTW - Trump's White House lawn urging of China to investigate Biden shows that increased scrutiny only goads Trump to behave worse.
50
"There’s no reason for Democrats to end things now."
Yes there is - the reason is that most people just aren't interested.
It's outrageous that that's the case, it's sad, it's bad for the Republic - but it's already clear that American's don't care, and lengthening the proceedings won't change that.
These articles don't cover everything, it's true, but they're enough. The hearings didn't move the needle. The evidence didn't move the needle. Again, outrageous and sad, but we need to move on.
85
@R W I think it's more accurate to say that people have made up their minds, and less that they're not interested. I haven't paid a bunch of attention to the Judiciary Committee actions because, well, I made up my mind already.
1
Agreed, but in the interest of time vis a vis the coming election, Dems chose to concentrate on the most egregious violations. Minimizing the number of crimes magnifies their seriousness and allows voters to see that Dems aren't "picking on" Trump, they are defending democracy against him. They can still list the entire litany of Trump's crimes, but the primaries will be here by then and we'll be nowhere near getting rid of that scoundrel. I don't know why Dems don't answer Repubs charges that they werent given all of the information. It is simple - their president is an obstructionist, and he's doing what he does best.
54
@Kathy B : Trump and the Democrat party are both determined to destroy the nation so every body better move to Central America or Canada.
@Kathy B
The history of the Democratic National Committee under Trump has been an unwillingness to actually stand up boldly and oppose in words and actions his outrageous destruction of democracy, cruelty to the poor and immigrants and complete furtherance to the interests of the uber-rich. Yet, look ath the 2018 elections- Local rank and file democrats took maters into their hands and took back the House. Look at impeachment. When Pelosi finally got pushed enough to demand impeachment, there was a big groundswell of enthusiasm among rank and file among the rank and file. We are essentially fighting a 5th column with the DNC who would rather side with Trump (as they did on the July Border Bill) than listen to the rank and file. I'm a llot more concerned about the 50 million marginalized people in our society coming out and voting against Trump than a relatively thin stripe of better off people who threaten to not vote or even vote for Trump rather than a progessive like elizabeth Warren (who is not a socialist no matter what Trump and right wing Demo leaders say!)
1
Democrats in the House are well aware, if they do not move quickly and the impeachment inquiry goes into the election season next year to far, the Democrats could be charged with attempting to interfere with the 2020 election. The impeachment inquiry thereby requires the speed to get it done as quickly as possible, hopefully by the end of 2019 or shortly thereafter in January.
“[T]he fate of the House majority ... and ... of the ... Democratic nominee’s presidential campaign ... rests more on the national political environment than the particulars of each swing congressional district. Individual Democrats [ran] on health care in 2018 and other “kitchen table” issues, but ... anti-Trump energy ... put these districts within reach, and it will be anti-Trump energy that drives the outcome next year. If the president is unpopular — if he’s mired in controversy — Democrats will likely win. If ... Trump can overcome scandal and recover ground with some voters, he’ll win re-election. And those vulnerable House Democrats [will] lose, along with the party’s nominee.”
Those are major league factual assertions and predictions about voter behavior.
The assertions about the national political environment seem inconsistent with the D base’s criticisms of the electoral college these last few years.
But for D cowardice in 2010 I’d doubt you have a better feel for the politics of swing districts or states than the people who represent them (or for that matter better than Nancy Pelosi).
What (besides the logic of preferred narratives) supports these assertions and predictions?
They could probably come up with 200 if they took enough time.
2 is fine, the point will be made and then we move on.
We have an election to win, can't afford to get bogged down in a congressional food fight, which is exactly what the GOP wants.
Keep in mind that this still has to go to the senate, which will be another circus sideshow and eat up more valuable time.
4
@JayK
Excellent point. That's the trap that the Republicans were using: overwhelm the process with objections based on minutia, to run out the clock. or using straw dogs, red herrings, diversionary tactics.
Just make the 1-2 punch, keep it simple, the KO is delivered. Get back to business of working for the common good. Let the Republicans run their theatrics in the Senate.
Right, who cares that there is a laughing hyena piloting the plane. With patience, technology might develop a parachute that can be installed on a plane while in flight, and then we'll all be saved.
Interesting the author ends his piece with "Democrats should . . . use the power of impeachment to set the terms of the next election — to shape the national political landscape in their favor." Exactly what the founders had in mind for impeachment, no? And isn't that one of the articles of impeachment: using political power to influence an election?
1
There's a key difference - Trump enlisted FOREIGN powers to influence an election, which is expressly forbidden. By your logic, even the very act of campaigning would be illegal.
9
Your comment made me think. I appreciate that. That said I think this is flawed logic. Maybe you could use that argument for an incumbent (which still wouldn't work). The diiference I see is campaigning isn't granted under the constitution. Impeachment is a granted constitutional authority. So by using a constitutional power to further a political goal is an abuse of power.
We all know that there could be 100 counts of impeachment sent from the House to the Senate and the Republican Senate would never vote to convict Trump on any of the counts. Just as the Southern (formerly Confederate) States used voter suppression and gerrymandering to win control in their states, the current Senate will never convict Trump.
The best we who opposed the "dirty tricks" of the Republican party during Watergate and oppose the tactics of the state and local Republican parties now can hope for is exposing the bigotry and voter suppression tools in use today to the awareness of all the voters.
The values of the USA are under attack by radical far right zealots who want a theocracy and a continued power base in white supremacy. Voting, organizing and educating is necessary to keep our representative democracy functioning.
5
@Lynda I firmly believe the Republican held Senate will not remove Trump from office. The result, however, will then be an unbridled president, caught in the act of election meddling but not reprimanded, and now given carte blanche to continue this gross mishandling of his office. In every possible way.
The 2020 election will not be fair. Getting out the vote will not work. Trump will be re-elected and then, with the 'mandate' of the re-election, will spend the next four years completing the Russification of the US.
I am beyond sad about this. America, you are lost.
Honestly people, what did we expect? That the the white majority would leave the stage quietly, and exit from the halls of power in a calm and peaceful fashion? Do we not know them and what they are capable of? It was just a short time ago that we wrested from their unconstitutional hands our civil rights. They beat us and jailed us and murdered us. But we prevailed at the ballot box. If they have any power they will hang on to it as though their lives depended upon it and when it comes to self preservation they are proving that the Constitution and their Oaths of Office mean nothing. That Constitution was written for them, not us, we took it and used it to our advantage against them and we will again because it is ours too. We did the same thing with the Bible, we reinterpreted it to mean what Jesus would have it mean, we used it to free ourselves from their unconstitutional grasp and we will again. We will vote and vote and vote and vote and vote....
12
Good. Please vote. I hope you realize that not all white people are like this though. We are not all scared to death of being in the minority. I really don’t get why this frightens some people so much. Do they never leave their own little community? Seems like a boring way to live.
2
No need to categorize these people by their race.
More to the point is to categorize them by their racism.
1
Never underestimate the ruthlessness and solidarity of white men.
I don’t think we can wait forever and we need to get rid of this guy ASAP. However, I see no reason why an emolument clause article couldn’t be added because it’s just simple math and most of the financial dealings are public record. It’s easy to understand, even for the average Trump voter. 
6
With republicans in the senate seemingly ignorant of trump’s offenses, 2,002 articles would be insufficient.
Disgraceful behavior that Elwood crumble the American democracy.
One article? Two articles? 107 articles? What difference do you think it will make? He's not going to be removed.
2
@RNS More articles would mean:
1. Accuracy.
2. A fulfilling of the legal obligation of the House.
3. A fuller exposure of Trump's crimes. People who have not kept up with the daily revelations may now pay more attention during a formal impeachment.
4. A longer trial in the Senate, which would reach still more people and draw attention to the corruption for a longer period of time.
5. Support from the people who want an honest government and will vote next year. What Schiff and Pelosi don't seem to see is that by ignoring the many other offenses, including the many instances of obstruction of justice in Muellers formal report, they will lessen popular support for the House. This version of impeachment appears timid, at best, or calculated to move through the Senate quickly, so it can be forgotten. We do not want timidity and forgetfulness. We cannot fight foulness with timidity and forgetfulness.
6
@Jake Jackson watching the Senate trial will be for most Americans worse then watching paint dry. Extending the trial will ensure complete tune-out. The Speaker was right to hold to 2 articles of impreachment.
1
I don’t think there is any reason that the House needs to stop investigating Mr Trump or his cronies, nor do I think that merely advancing these articles precludes advancing other articles.
Yes, the first attempt had better score, but the House needn’t sit on its hands once these articles go forward.
5
Speaker Pelosi is doing the right thing for the Republic. Its apparent the GOP has devolved very close to lawlessness as its brand (in its pursuit of tRump in power at any price).
If tRump is acquitted of serious crimes by the GOP Senate, then the Constitution is at risk. The two articles are enough to remove tRump in a fair trial and will still set the precedent that lawless behavior by the President gets you impeached.
3
I completely agree that the House should investigate every aspect of President Trump's corruption. Jamelle Bouie wisley advises Democrats to take their own sweet time. Alas, if past performance is any guide, Democrats still have five years to investigate this president.
3
Thank you, Jamelle.
Trump has committed many many high crimes and misdemeanors that are impeachable, not just his Ukraine extortion/briber and his Ukraine-related obstruction.
The Dems need to relentlessly expose ALL his gangsterism and impeach on multiple counts.
8
Time is on the Democrats side. Assuming trump wins the next election and the Democrats take the senate, the impeachment process can begin anew. This time with the latest impeachment offenses trump commits to get re-elected. Let’s keep the gun powder dry and be patient, it is just a matter of time until this criminal falls.
6
The impeachment articles should be written not to just convince the Senate, which probably will not happen, but also the public. And a public outcry may even move two or three Republican senators.
One of the Republican defenses to the impeachment will be that maybe Trump did something "wrong" in dealing with the Ukraine, but it was just an isolated mistake and doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
The articles should set out a series of Trump's acts to show that the self dealing and criminal behavior of the Ukraine dealings were just part of a continuing series of offenses going back to the beginning of his administration. The result will be a case that is much more convincing.
7
I am so confused as to why all of these other violations and crimes by Trump and his 'associates' are not as significant if not more so, in building a more comprehensive case for impeachment. Will there be continuing or expanded legal action against Trump after Impeachment, for the rest of his malfeasances? Is there a strategy to dethrone the supposed king, and then confront all of the other 'actors' so that there can not be a litany of pardons?
8
This was a "happy now?" impeachment. Pelosi doesn't want to do this—she, like far too many Democrats at her level, still thinks that Republicans act in good faith and are worth dealing with at all. Americans know otherwise; so do Republicans.
(That makes voting Bernie that much more important: he's been more of a Democrat when unregistered than most Democrats in the party leadership.)
5
Exactly, Pelosi is still under the mistaken impression that catering to moderates is the way to go. That is despite the fact that the energy that drove the gains in the midterms came from progressives who want additional impeachment charges such as obstruction of justice.
4
@Eric "the energy that drove the gains in the midterms came from progressives who want additional impeachment charges such as obstruction of justice." Uh no, while there was general discontent pretty centrist Dems and Independents with Trumpism, the majority of the Dem representatives who defeated Repubs in 2018 was their emphasis on 'kitchen table' issues, particularly health insurance, gun control and support for family issues (education, childcare and pay disparity), especially among suburban white women who are abandoning Trump in droves. As Speaker Pelosi said when announcing that articles of impeachment were in the works, impeachment was necessary to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and not about disagreements on policy, however egregious Trump has made them.
2
Delay works in Trumps favor.. particularly if court decisions are required.. as Trump will just keep appealing.
I disagree with the author here.
More articles of impeacment = more opportunity for Republicans to create confusion and keep yelling over reach. A shotgun approach is not the correct strategy because of this.
A surgical strike with the two articles presented today is likely the best and most focuse approach.. mainly because you only need one conviction to remove the president from office.. so stick with those that are most clearly a violation of the constitution and the oath of office and have the most actual witness testimony and evidence in hand.
8
@Chuck I agree!
Mr. Bouie,
I could not agree with you more. There not only needs to be an impeachment hearing, we need to enumerate how many wrongs Trump has committed for the are many indeed. The public needs to be made aware of the enormity of Trump's crimes.
It will easy for the Senate Republicans to pass the hurdle of a mere two charges. It would be much more difficult to get through a tangle of multiple charges, one of them will stick. He cannot get away with every single one of them. At least the chances will be better.
As it stands now, I am deeply disappointed. The Democratic Party has been timid for too long while the Republicans are bold, ruthless and unrepentant.
7
Whatever happens with the narrowly drafted articles of impeachment we have, I would like to see the House respond fully to claims against its prerogatives by the Executive branch and investigate other stonewalling public officials for the same crimes charged against Trump.
I also agree that contrary to Republican talking points, a drawn out inquiry turning up ever more evidence would not be good for Trump. He’s already near complete lunacy.
4
Trump has lived a life of illegal perfidious behavior. Broke campaign laws bribing various women directing Michael Cohen to commit a felony, encouraged Russia to investigate Hillary Clinton through Wiki Leaks, and the Mueller report to name a few.
Held secret undocumented conversations with Putin hiding what? Spent years maneuvering his tax records out of public scrutiny. What treasures might they hold?
In legal terms throw the book at him. Our survival as a nation mandates his removal and the senate will not provide us any relief. Constant interrogation pressure from all corners and a political defeat will.
2
It should have been:
Bribery and corruption
Abuse of power
Obstruction of Congress
Obstruction of Justice
9
These two articles of impeachment barely scratch the surface of the extent of Trump's impeachable offenses. That said, these kinds of debates are tantamount to arguing about the deck chairs on the Titanic.
The real question is - what are we (the majority of citizens so I'm told) going to do, when this Republican Senate lets Trump walk away from criminal conduct that can only be described as breathtaking?
What are we going to do? Sit back and hope we may get rid of Trump in 2020? Remain as passive as we have been these past three years? For the most part, the few rallies have been media events, and protest has not been sustained.
It is as if the majority of us believe that someone, or something is going to rescue us, still. News flash - it's not gonna happen. And Trump will take his "exoneration" as a license to commit even more extreme acts. Perhaps expanding the internment camps to include those of us who are brown-skinned citizens might be next.
The fact is, we who are the majority of U.S. citizens are in uncharted territory. We have a "president" who should be removed from office, but won't be, because he has a large, rabid, heavily armed base who are in lockstep with him. They will literally do anything Trump asks of them, up to and including acts of violence.
From our response, it appears that we're content to simply wait for election day 2020 (as if an election were a given). But understand this - Trump will only leave a time of his choosing, and not a day earlier.
4
It's about timing, too.
I suspect Pelosi agrees with our columnist, but is playing a game for the Senate. If they keep it narrow, the Senate will vote against removal before the election in 2020. Every one of the open Senate seats will be a referendum on Trump, because each of the Senators will have voted to keep him in office. It gives the Democrats a lot to run on in the Senate and in the Congress. "Senator Incumbent approves of Donald Trump!" And the candidate for the Presidency will have an embarrassment of riches to pick from.
Another thing - Do you really think that there won't be some new impeachable offense coming down the road? Don't worry. Trump can't help himself.
The problem is, the GOP would probably love to bounce Trump in year one of term two, because then they get Pence - a true believer - and he'll have three years to consolidate a White House that'll look great in comparison for 2024. 12 more years. Get rid of them both now, if you can.
3
One of the few times I agree with you Mr. Bouie.
We are on the same wave length with Trump. He is an ego maniac demagogue and those are some of the nicer things I can say about him. He is the biggest threat to our democracy since the Civil War.
I am of the opinion that if impeachment is not popular by a clear majority of swing state voters don't do it. It doesn't matter if one is technically or legally correct but helps give Trump another term. Better to listen to swing state voters and oust him thru the election.
However if you are gonna go thru with impeachment in any circumstance do it slowly and throw on the kitchen sink with any crimes that can be backed up by facts.
With the democrat offering only two, it sounds like they are scared to tick off swing state voters.
2
I disagree: Everyone who cares to know realizes who and what Trump is, what he's done, etc.
The facts are out there. No minds will be changed whether the indictment has two charges or 200.
And time is critical. Every day that orange Russian satellite is in the White House increases the danger, the problems, and the work necessary to repair the damages.
If anyone senses the right strategy here, it's Nancy Pelosi; and she says to get it done expeditiously.
Besides, the Senate will never vote to remove Trump; in fact, most of them like what he's doing: eviscerating the government, stimying progress, helping his followers, at least the big dogs, get richer.
4
1) Jamelle Bouie is correct.
2) David Leonhardt's is correct: "The Eight Counts of Impeachment That Trump Deserves." NYT, 12/08/19
3) The House must bring further articles of impeachment under the precise Constitutional wording: "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" and explicate each precisely. Both history and the current state of current events demand it.
4) Treason.
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting the overthrow the government.
Treason against the United States, shall consist
in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Americans are learning about the Founding Fathers' tutelage in English Common Law. Here, as with "high Crimes and Misdemeanors", the language on Treason comes from England. Put plainly, the Lord Chief Justice in 1917 charged a jury to apply those very words from the English Treason Act of 1351 with this succinct definition: "if a subject commits an act which weakens or tends to weaken the power of the country to resist or to attack the enemies of the country, that is in law the giving of aid and comfort to the enemies."
5) It is clear that Robert Mueller expected his exhaustive report to be taken up by Congress as the factual research upon which to bring Articles of Impeachment, and it was derelict of Congress not to immediately do so. However, it is not too late. Each of the above-recommended articles should be buttressed by the undisputed facts of the Mueller Report.
2
Trump ended up giving Ukraine money for weapons that even Obama withheld. There is no direct evidence (only second hand) that Trump used this weapons money to advance his own interests, even though all presidents in the past have used weapons money for other country as part of negotiations. How about the US overthrowing of Libya - once the richest nation in Africa - by Obama and Hillary. As well as using our military to change the elected governments of Syria and Ukraine under Obama.
I hate Trump, but is what he has done in slowing up Raytheon weapons to Ukraine an impeachable offense. Worse than GW Bush lying us into a war with Iraq - which Nancy Pelosi at the time said was not worth impeachment.
Meanwhile Trump is eliminating food stamps for some 700,000 recipients and the Democrats are doing nothing about it. They have also reauthorized the Patriot Act without much pushback.
2
@steve
The Trump"lethal" support for Ukraine (vs "wimpy" Obama) canard has long ago been dismissed.
"Under the conditions of the foreign military sale, the Trump administration stipulates that the Javelins must be stored in western Ukraine—hundreds of miles from the battlefield. Experts say the conditions of the sale render them useless in the event of a sustained low-level assault—the kind of attack Ukraine is most likely to face from Russia."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/03/far-from-the-front-lines-javelin-missiles-go-unused-in-ukraine/
Mr All-Roads-Lead-To-Putin installed in our White House would never get lethal to Vlad.
1
Not one person ever testified that Trump said that he was withholding aid from Ukraine until there was an investigation of Biden. Not one heard him say that. All that was said was a combination of hearsay and allegations based on circumstances. Since, unlike Clinton, Trump will not be deposed, you can't get him on lying under oath either. This is a complete waste of time and money. It will not bring out the vote - except for Trump voters who are now enraged. This impeachment has lost the 2020 election. Nice.
Completely agree with this editorial. Giving Trump the expedited process he wants is a travesty.
1
It was a mistake not to include the obstruction of the Mueller probe as a separate article, but in the end, there is no real possibility that the senate trial will result in any reprimand of Trump. The point of implementing the impeachment process was to show the 15% of the electorate that will decide thd 2020 election what a vile human being Trump is and to reveal to them the republican party for what it is, a group of out-of-touch minions of the rich and powerful desperate to hold on to power and forestall the progressive wave as long as possinle.
1
These elected officials are absolutely fantastic at sniffing out corruption in politicians of the other party, with which they compete of course. Dems are fabulous in seeing Trump's corruption and that is an excellent thing. They were much more forgiving of the corruption in the Bill and Hillary White House.
Ditto of the GOP. They saw Democrat Clinton's corruption a lot more vividly and enthusiastically than that of Republican Trump.
Focus only 2 major themes, abuse of power and coverup has the enormous advantage of keeping the voters attention riveted on the really major issues. As it should be.
High Crimes and Misdemeanors are violations, threats to violate, and contradictions of the Constitution.
The president swears to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution..."
When the president contradicts the Constitution in word and official action those are violations of the Oath of Office, and a threat to the Constitution and the Republic.
High Crimes by Trump:
-calling for violence against U.S. citizens without mention of a law or due process. The Constitution replaced political violence by the king with debate and voting, and laws written by Congress and executed by regulated, independent law enforcement.
-saying, "the Press is the enemy of the People," and calling for violence against journalists. The Press is protected by the First Amendment.
-saying the Emoluments Clause is "phony." That is a statement of INTENT to violate the Emoluments Clause, which he keeps doing by taking payments from foreign governments.
-saying that he would take information from foreign governments and use it in elections is a statement of INTENT to let other countries interfere in our elections. He then asked Ukraine in secret, and CHINA ON TV!
-Refusing to coordinate and obstructing the defense of our elections from attacks by Russia, which the entire U.S. Intelligence Community says are still happening.
-Attacking our defenders and praising our attackers.
-saying he can take away birthright citizenship against the 14th Amendment.
-calling critics "treasonous," as if King.
Etc.
3
@McGloin
Spot on!
Violations of the Constitutional Oath as you've outlined constitute Treason.
4) Treason.
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting the overthrow the government.
Treason against the United States, shall consist
in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Americans are learning about the Founding Fathers' tutelage in English Common Law. Here, as with "high Crimes and Misdemeanors", the language on Treason comes from England. Put plainly, the Lord Chief Justice in 1917 charged a jury to apply those very words from the English Treason Act of 1351 with this succinct definition: "if a subject commits an act which weakens or tends to weaken the power of the country to resist or to attack the enemies of the country, that is in law the giving of aid and comfort to the enemies."
5) It is clear that Robert Mueller expected his exhaustive report to be taken up by Congress as the factual research upon which to bring Articles of Impeachment, and it was derelict of Congress not to immediately do so. However, it is not too late. Each of the above-recommended articles should be buttressed by the undisputed facts of the Mueller Report.
I am agnostic on the number of articles, but I had to laugh at one turn of phrase: "pursue testimony from."
If that is not a dog chasing its tail, I don't know what is.
Well.. that's all there is..TWO articles of impeachment. And if they're "nowhere near enough"..then tough luck.
.-- The 2020 election has always been the bulwark against Trump..and it still is. Dems are fools if they think Republicans in the Senate are going to remove Trump from office.
-Trump will be the President in 2020, and the economy looks to be pretty good. ----So Dems better stop whining that '2 articles of impeachment aren't enough'..and get their act together for the 2020 election.
2
These two articles of impeachment may only serve to fuel the Republican party's chutzpah. Trump's antics has many southerners convinced he's the second coming of Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards - Governor Edwards famously said - "The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy".
If he is impeached and tried for certain offences does this mean that he could raise a double jeopardy defence if charged with a substantially similar offence after he is no longer president? If so, perhaps certain matters are being held in reserve to be pursued by a Democrat lead Department of Justice in the future. Its a nice thought anyway.
@DAC
I've been told by knowledgeable people that impeachment by Congress has no effect on criminal actions. If Trump were to be impeached for obstruction of justice, and then convicted by the Senate, he could still face criminal charges for obstruction of justice after he is removed from office.
Note: I'm relating what I have been told; I may be wrong.
What most don't seem to understand is that we are not trying to convince Republicans to change their minds.
What we need to do is to educate the American People on the threat to their Constitution and their Republic so they will put enough pressure on the government to end the threat.
Those who support Trump are not dupes. They enjoy being in on it.
A large portion of the Country would rather give Trump unlimited powers than to be equal to minorities, non-christians, LGBTQs, or "liberals"( which is what they call anyone from radical anarchists to John McCaine).
The point is to draw a line in the sand in front of the Constitution and have 250 million Americans standing on that line, saying no you cannot make your pathological liar "president for life" by lying about it over and over.
Do it now, and do it again next week, and the week after, until Trump is removed from office, one way or the other.
You cannot just let presidents habitually violate their Oaths of Office without documenting the violations, and calling them High Crimes.
If you do not impeach Trump on ALL of his High Crimes, then the next Republican President will just say, "Trump did it," and do it again.
Mueller was a trap. The Democrats spent two years not attacking Trump's High Crimes, and then were so comfortable saying nothing, they said nothing about an impeachment referral from Trump's own Justice Department!
The Ukraine is a trap.
It is the Public High Crimes that destroy a constitution.
1
A narrow, focused impeachment is the way to go. It’s not just to protect moderates, it’s to make it stick. If the Democrats expand the scope to more issues, the wildly different articles will distract from each other and blunt the impact.
The power of the Ukraine case is its simplicity. It’s easy to describe and remember. Trump withheld congressionally authorized military aid to a foreign power in an attempt to pressure them into giving him political ammunition against another presidential candidate. He then took every possible step to undermine and obstruct Congress’ inquiry into his actions. There’s nothing vague here and the evidence is mountainous and damning. There will be a political cost to the Republicans who vote to acquit him.
3
@Eric What if the case for impeachment falls short? What if impeachment fails to pass in the House?
All of the Quid Pro Quo and Investigating a Political Rival miss the deeper point: the president withheld hundreds of millions of dollars in crucial, congressionally authorized military aid to Ukraine.
That act alone is treasonous.
That act undermined US security in Europe, by weakening Ukraine, and strengthening Russia.
Moreover, every time Trump, (and now Barr too), says “it was Ukraine, not Russia” in 2016, he weakens Ukraine with an illegitimate smear, while strengthening Russia by exonerating Russia for 2016.
This endless accusation of Ukraine by Trump has been exquisitely coordinated with Putin, not only with in-plain-sight media signaling, but certainly also in many or most or all of the 17 meetings Trump has had with Putin, especially those when no one else was present and even the translator’s notes were confiscated and destroyed.
Trump is a Russian Agent. This is Treason.
1
Hmmmm
What is enough you ask?
Let's forget for a minute about national security, election rigging, and Vlad.
Let's forget about shady "private lawyers" running even shadier "back channels" with fledging foreign nationals.
Lets forget that the govt. experts trusted with geo-pol matters with foreign leaders were completely cut out- and smeared.
Let's forget that the shakedown only ended when the shady deal was exposed.
Let's forget that this is what mobsters do.
Donald needs to lie under oath about an intimate act with a consenting adult (Stormy ?)
(remember Bill Clinton?)
Will that be enough ?
2
Why no articles of impeachment for witness intimidation seen by the entire country on television and twitter? The victim even stated such in the hearing. Let's see the republicans tell us we didn't read or hear what we saw and heard! Because the democratics don't go for it all and hardcore like the republicans, they will loss. Thank you for this important article.....peace, back by popular demand
1
Because the next election is less than a year away time is not on the side of the Democrats.
Having frittered away her Article I Iegislative duties and powers to check and balance the Article II executive branch while waiting for the Republicans Jeff Sessions. Bob Mueller, Rod Rosenstein and Bill Barr to save her the time and trouble Nancy Pelosi has done more than expected and less than required to confine and control the imperial Presidency.
The Mueller Report and the DOJ IG reports took too opaque long to matter.
2
Can not agree. The "chosen one" is without sin to his devoted followers. nothing will change their minds. Vote impeachment, the senate will not convict, let their judgement hand around their necks. Run the next election on health care and reform.
1
Maybe if they do them two at a time, the Democrats can keep bringing new ones when McConnell squashes the first two.
Nancy Pelosi is a coward, and her inability to prosecute a clear criminal is essentially dereliction of duty. No bribery? No Emoulments violations? Of course, Pelosi is an old school grafter herself, made fat and happy by decades of campaign contributions from banks, pharmaceutical companies, weapons manufacturers and more. She is reluctant to expose financial perfidy probably because it is highly probable she is guilty of exactly the same. A real leader would have started this process long ago, and used every single tape of footage of Republican senators defending the president against him as a sharp and vicious pointed weapon.
1
I agree that more articles would be better, and delaying to give further time for investigations and for the message to sink in with the electorate would be wise.
This is for history and for democracy, and the full range of corrupt behaviour should be reflected in the indictments.
However, the issue facing further investigations now is the stonewalling by Trump, which has been addressed in the article of impeachment for obstruction of Congress.
I feel the key lies in the House's power of inherent contempt.
Either file or hold the present articles of impeachment ... but in either case, in the meanwhile, use the House's powers of inherent contempt - in these exceptional circumstances - to fine and jail administration officials who do not respond to congressional subpoenas.
This will get investigations moving via use of the House's powers of inherent contempt while they delay impeachment in the Senate while the House investigates and refines further articles of impeachment. Or, use these powers to investigate the issues further while impeachment is proceeding in the Senate.
2
@Lauchlan
The House has no real power with inherant comptempt though. If they use it... it will trigger quick stays from sympathetic judges in the courts if they apply it in the current partisan environment.
By the way.. nothing says the House cannot continue to investigate and gather evidence for more articles.... but it will take a long time... probably longer then the time left to the election to gain any benefit.
@Chuck they absolutely do have the power. They can find people in contempt by a vote, and then fine and jail people immediately.
Those actions may then get appealed in the courts, which presumably takes a long time ... but in the meanwhile the stonewalling people are sitting in jail, or have the threat of a large fine (hopefully $100K for civil servants or $1M+ for wealthy cabinet officials) hanging over them, plus facing personal legal fees to fight it.
This works for Democrats in the House in the same way that stonewalling works for Trump. The immediate benefit is theirs, it is up to the defendant (the stonewaller) to fight it. And it is up to the stonewaller personally to fund the legal fees to fight it, which might not always be an option.
I recall the Bolton case to resolve his report's conflict between executive privilege and congressional subpoenas was meant to be considered in court today, hopefully that will move things forward too.
the House issued two counts only - why not keep on keeping on with respect to the rest? - play it out, including a full court press on enforcement as to no show witnesses and stonewalling re documents in the third branch of government that is supposed to ensure due process, no man above the law, and institutional checks and balances (Congress's rights vis-a-vis the executive), namely the judiciary.
just like the GOP Senate having their feet held to the fire, do the same with Trump's judicial appointees.
Dems can walk and chew gum at same time.
6
@Mark wrote Dems can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Maybe.. but voters can't and won't. Simple, concise, difficutl to obfuscate is the way to go in front of voters.
The American people can barley handle just the objective truth of impeachment itself - let alone understand any more articles than two. Its the depth of the two articles of impeachment that are the most important aspect. Let's accept what the Democratic leadership have decided and support them implicitly. There is far too much at stake to complain.
8
I want Congress to investigate every illegal act he is accused of. And his family too.
13
Donald Trump is unAmerican. What more is there to say?
So sick of our hard earned tax money going to this man who has betrayed us all.
He needs to be cast away from our White House and all that goes with that.
4
You are absolutely correct. The impeachment process is the best way to expose the President on all the lies he told, misdeeds and crimes he has committed. There is no better way to showcase it to the public which is pathetically apolitical and naive.
I agree that once the ball is in McConnell’s court, it is a different show. A show ran by a professional crook rather than a half-alive and half-hearted Pelosi. How I wished AOC was running the process with the help of Tlaib and Omar!
4
The two articles of impeachment are the most obvious and easily provable. In my home today, there was a lot of discussion about the wisdom of handing Trump the trade deal at the same time. Then I read it was to take away from him the ability to call them
“ do nothing Democrat’s.” So it may have been calculated as strategic by the Speaker. Still, I think it looked weak.
As far as further investigation of wrongdoing is concerned, to me the most compelling reason is that there is so much more to look into and who else is there who can do it, they must finish the job of exposing all the corruption in the Trump presidency.
I have no idea what the best strategy is. We've got a Republican Party that simply won't act responsibly because its voters don't want it to act responsibly.
The Democrats can investigate or stop investigating. It won't make any difference. It's all going to come down to whether enough Americans want to save their democracy—and whether those that do want to save Democracy constitute a large enough population distributed advantageously to allow the Democrats to hold their majority in the House, take over the Senate, and win the majority of electoral votes.
I don't think there's much chance of the Democrats doing that in the end. I think American democracy is dead. If we want to get it back, we may need to take radical action—a revolution or secession of the blue states. Elections and impeachment won't work.
2
@617to416
.. Actually the "best strategy" is very straight forward....--
-- Win in 2020. ( & quit your whining).
1
The investigation has dominated the headlines for weeks and Trump’s supporters don’t seem to care:
“The president’s approval hasn’t fallen, but it also hasn’t grown, despite the strong economy.”
If his support hasn’t fallen by now do you really think more charges will make a difference? It could backfire and turn up the volume on calls of a witch-hunt.
8
@Bronx Jon
Trump's supporters are beside the point. There aren't enough of them to re-elect him. There weren't even enough of them to elect him the first time. Not everybody who voted for him was, or is now, a "Trump supporter." Many of them are not likely to make the same (stupid) mistake again.
1
A completely open-ended impeachment inquiry without end would be excessive, and risk establishing a precedent that might be abused later.
The greater danger, however, is that by impeaching narrowly -as the two proposed articles would- the House is defacto saying that Trump's many other violations (of the emoluments and appointments clauses, of campaign funding laws, of obstructing justice and intimidating witnesses in the Mueller investigation, etc.), are okay. They are not. They are crimes and breaches of his oath of office.
Furthermore, even within the more limited scope of the two proposed articles, considerable important information has been blocked and witnesses withheld, at least some of which could probably be sued for. This might include redacted portions of the Mueller report, redactions from the Ukraine phone call, and testimony from further officials such as Tillerson, Sessions, Barr, Bolton and Giuliani.
Impeachment is a drastic step, and the articles of impeachment and backing documentation need to show more fully how drastic the threat is, to our republic and our Constitution, from this renegade president. And, as Mr. Bouie rightly notes, before this is passed to the Senate.
House Democrats allowed evidence to pile up for months before finally starting impeachment. A few weeks further delay, and a reduction in excessive primary campaign schedules, is readily affordable and well-worth it in order to build a sound and well-structured impeachment.
11
How funny. Even impeaching the guy and removing him from office won't be enough for some of the hard-core Trump haters.
.
I never really liked the guy, but - and I think I'm like many Americans on this - I like what the Dems are doing to him and to our country a lot less.
.
Too late now, folks, your train left the station. Good luck.
4
@West Coaster Another Trump supporter in Mufti. Get ready for them all over social media both foreign and domestic. My favorite phony line is " I am a progressive but,,,,,,
2
@West Coaster
Many voters would prefer Trump lose the 2020 election and receive the rejection he and the Republican party deserve from the majority of voters in the USA as well as the Electoral College. The Republicans are not doing the job they have been elected to do and swore an oath they would do. Thus the House Democrats are forced to impeach Trump knowing that the Senate Republicans will never look at the evidence which supports the counts of impeachment made public today.
Let's hope the Impeachment trial in the Senate is so obviously partisan from the Republicans that voters look at the evidence and Trump's support weakens more. He is unfit to be president and those supporting him in the Senate and as "private" lawyers are also unfit in fulfilling their duties as patriots.
2
Removing Trump from office would be more than enough.
"Democrats, in other words, can use the power of impeachment to set the terms of the next election"
They already have.
1
18 U.S. Code § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant.
Tweeting about congressional witnesses against him exactly fits this statue. We have seen what his fanatic followers are capable of. It's exactly like he puts out a mob hit on the subjects of his tweets and statements.
24
@John well put, and why is this not one of the easiest to prove charges?
2
If Congress had any standing left in American society then it might matter how the House proceeded. As things are now it hasn't and won't. Democrats are more afraid of the impeachment train rolling over on them than anything else. It may anyway however many hearings they conduct. The election is still Trump's to lose.
1
Since the investigation continues and additional evidence piles up, plus if renegade witnesses decide to “cooperate”, new articles of impeachment could be filed. Let’s not despair.
43
This piece describes the ideal that Democrats could hope for, if they also held the Senate - we don't, which means that Dems have to do what's possible at the moment to protect the Constitution from this president and from Complicit Crowd.
Impeachment does not stop House Dems from issuing subpoenas and continuing investigations.
Pelosi is correct to toss this potato over to McConnell, and let him (and Mrs. McConnell) and the GOP become ever more tightly strapped to Jabberwock 45* as the White House proceeds to divide their party - Pelosi is continuing to feed him enough rope to self-impeach, and act even further 'un-precedential'.
Each succeeding news cycles' scandals will make this POTUS more and more odious, and he will drag his party further and further towards the bottom.
44
This as close to "sweeping it under the rug" as Nancy could get, given the blatant defiance that Trump exhibited in breaking the law. Pelosi never wanted to pursue impeachment, but Trump's audacity forced her hand. But because she dawdled, it led to a timeline that short-circuited a thorough investigation and exposure of Trump's crimes and assault on our democracy. And that was no mistake - she used cold. political calculus to try to appease the progressives and the moderates, and placed that above her duty to the law and Constitution.
This is essentially a Potemkin impeachment, meant for show and political cover, and it will cause a backlash because it levied no consequences. It will prove to have been worse than doing nothing.
1
Wow, Mr. Bouie gets very little right in this column, the most egregious part being a claim that the Dems should use this process to shape the election to their benefit. And he's completely missing the strategic beauty of this document released today.
30
@J Darby What is the strategic beauty?
5
@Crystal H.
Do some research. There have been many analyses by smart political & legal people produced today about why this document was written the way it was.
I can think of more than a half dozen examples: Adhering to the KISS principle. Listing charges that are difficult if not impossible to factually dispute. Active voice and constitutional language.
3
@Crystal H. Sorry you got a smack down and a minimal response for asking a serious question.
I fear that the sense of victimhood that animates the Right would be multiplied by a lengthy impeachment process, and that Trump supporters would then be extremely motivated to vote in 2020.
13
Democrats have figured out how to manage rage like Republicans and their Fox News propaganda machine. Otherwise they would follow the author's advice and work their base into a lather in the run-up to the election.
All of the offenses that Mr. Bouie describes were committed well before the Ukraine affair came to light. Democrats chose not to initiate impeachment for any of them. The Ukraine matter was the most egregious and the House Dems recognized it as such. Adding articles to the indictment will not produce a single vote from Republicans in the House for impeachment or the Senate for removal. Do it now and force Republicans to go on record.
28
House should keep probing, so Democrats control the momentum and the narrative.
Once it goes to the Senate, they lose both.
28
Alas, Pelosi didn't have the advice of pundits, whose opinions undoubtedly are spread across a wide continuum. Of course, there is also the possibility she knows what she's doing.
78
@Jarrell
Hear, hear!
4
@Jarrell Yes, she has the brains to actually get Trump impeached in the House. If she listened to the armchair commenters here, Trump would not be impeached and that would be part of his next campaign slogan. Some people here never learn. They live in a bubble.
@Jarrell -- Actually, I think the possibility exists that you and I, Jamie and Nancy, all know what we're doing. The Rank and File democrats need to create a howl of protest from the left to add even more impeachment article, to imprison more Republicans who have broken laws, etc, to threaten every legal means necessary to restore our democracy. This gives Pelosi leeway to maneuver. She can choose what she wants -- swing a little more to the left and show deference to the democratic base, or stay pretty much where she is and tell the Republicans "look I'm being nice to you," my base wants red meat. The base keeps up the pressure and she acts as a slight brake on the pressure, but not too much. This makes her look reasonable, which is politically saleable.
JFK said the same to Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights era -- he wanted the pressure applied to him so he could respond. It's up to Democrats to create pressure. Now. Call your congressional reps everyone.
I agree with Jamelle Bouie that only two articles of impeachment are an inadequate disappointment.
I concur with David Leonhardt's opinion piece (NYT, 12/08/19) where he outlined "The Eight Counts of Impeachment That Trump Deserves." In my opinion, counts 3-8 are just as important.
1. Obstruction of Justice ✓
2. Contempt of Congress ✓
3. Abuse of power
4. Impairing the administration of Justice
5. Acceptance of emoluments
6. Corruption of elections
7. Abuse of pardons
8. Conduct grossly incompatible with the presidency
275
@Sunny
Only a vote to convict on an article by 2/3s of the senate can unseat for impeachment.
Do you honestly think that using a shotgun approach like you are seeking will work to improve those odds? I don't because the more you put on the table.. the more Republcians can lie, confuse, deflect.. and the less Democrats can keep voters focused on the most egregious crimes here by Trump.
Basically... your 3 through 8 are subjective to most voters and to most people in Congress.. so they will just melt down along party lines and as such are a waste of energy for nothing.
3
@Chuck - he's not going to be removed by the Senate either way. But he cannot be pardoned for anything he is impeached for. Worth keeping in mind.
20
@Chuck - I also don't believe there is a chance Trump will be removed from office by the Senate. But for historical purposes alone, all his infractions should be documented within the articles of impeachment.
20
Our President got the best business deal of his life in being elected, and I'm not talking about his frequent paid holidays to his golf resorts. I suspect what's primarily motivating him at this point is knowing he will spend his post-Presidency years in jail. Regardless, listening to all the hearings of late, it becomes clear GOP lawmakers have no moral compass, that Trump won't be convicted in the Senate. I don't care who the Democratic Candidate turns out to be, this person has my vote.
124
@Jon Creamer I suffered from a deep depression when Trump was elected. It took the better part of two years to emerge from those depths.
Today, I still believe that Trump is a 'clear and present danger' to America, and the world. But, rather, I have come to terms with the fact that Trump has a purpose, and his purpose is to destroy America.
All I know, is that he's not my president, and I never voted for him. All I know, is that I will always be a 'Never Trumper', and that I did my part to speak out against him. And, that's the only reason why I can still sleep at night.
Like many things in life, the trick is in understanding the art of compromise. Now, I simply accept that there is nothing I can do to change the trajectory of Trump's America. Or, is it Putin's?
"Everybody is just going to have to deal with Trump....sooner, or later. And, it never hurts to get ahead of the pack."
5
@dad
I remember having the same response when Bush Jr. was re-elected. I could not get out of bed the next day. The first time Americans could maybe be excused for their mistake. The second time (with help from serious voter suppression) they knew better.
I’m terrified by what I might learn about America (and the Senate’s refusal to protect the vote) if Trump is re-elected. I think then it may be time to consider giving up and finding another country to live in. Canada is not far, if they’ll have me.
3
The Senate only has to pass one of the two Articles to have Trump impeached from office. Who can say with a straight face that Trump did not obstruct Congress in its investigation?
150
@Carl Lee:
Unfortunately his supporters and all of the Republicans in Congress.
14
@Carl Lee All the Republican Senators have demonstrated that they can say with straight albeit hideous faces that trump did not obstruct Congress in its investigation. The question would be better put if it were not rhetorical. I suggest that a better question would be who in Congress acts in the interests of democracy. It certainly is not any of the Republicans.
14
@Carl Lee Who can say with a straight face that Trump did nothing wrong? Unfortunately the Republicans do it every hour of every day. I agree that the Democrats are playing a weak hand with but two cards in it. Run the table with the additional articles for six months, so more of the electorate won’t be able to ignore Trump’s crimes.
11
"It’s mired the entire party in scandal, with no apparent cost to Democrats"--exactly --which means Democrats are right on target. Schiff did excellent with hearings and Articles is a culmination gaining momentum. If it ain't broke -don't fix it.
4
Oh my goodness.
AMEN.
(And mind you - I'm not a religious sort)
These are important articles, to be sure, and probably were advanced primarily because of the power of the evidence; but Individual One has been a continual threat to the country and the world ever since his first day in office. The House needs to continue the investigation.
168
@Jake
Stick with the most powerfully evidenced articles, in my view.
You only need one article to receive enough votes to convict in order to send Trump packing.
But honestly... removal is the desired outcome, but I gather that the House Dems feel these two articles will either achieve that.. or create a very concise and easy to understand case to voters ahead of the 2020 election. And I agree with their strategy.
3
@Jake
But guess what? he will tie Pelosi's hands in courts for all next year. Not a single WH clown will dare testify. Yes I am talking about Bolton, Malvaney,and Pompeo.
He will schedule rallies every week crying victimhood by Dems out to get him.
I wouldn't be surprised if he starts tonight in PA calling on his followers "to get ready" to defend their president.
i.e. he will hint of inciting civil unrest.
6
@morGan
"he will hint of inciting civil unrest." And that all by itself is impeachable. He has succeeded in turning half of this nation against the other half. If this boils up into an actual civil war, Trump is responsible...entirely responsible. He must be removed from office before he can completely destroy our nation.
1