My feelings on impeachment are, I trust, apparent – I’m for it. Simply on the volume of lies, if nothing else. How about others?
President Trump’s substantive defense against the ongoing impeachment inquiry has crumbled entirely—not just eroded or weakened, but been flattened like a sandcastle hit with a large wave.
It was never a strong defense. After all, Trump himself released the smoking gun early in L’Affaire Ukrainienne when the White House published its memo of Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. That document erased any question as to whether Trump had asked a foreign head of state to “investigate”—a euphemism for digging up dirt on—his political opponents. There was no longer any doubt that he had asked a foreign country to violate the civil liberties of American citizens by way of interfering in the coming presidential campaign. That much we have known for certain for weeks.
The clarity of the evidence did not stop the president’s allies from trying to fashion some semblance of defense. But the past few days of damaging testimony have stripped away the remaining fig leaves. There was no quid pro quo, we were told—except that it’s now clear that there was one. If there was a quid pro quo, we were told, it was the good kind of quid pro quo that happens all the time in foreign relations—except that, we now learn, it wasn’t that kind at all but the very corrupt kind instead. The Ukrainians didn’t even know that the president was holding up their military aid, we were told—except that, it turns out, they did know. And, the president said, it was all about anti-corruption. This was the most Orwellian inversion; describing such a corrupt demand as a request for an investigation of corruption is a bit like describing a speakeasy as an alcoholism treatment facility.
Steve Berman of The Resurgent thinks Trump is psychotic:
The impeachment of President Donald Trump is now near inevitable, as the Act 3 finale to his teleplay we call a presidency. We don’t know whether he will be removed. He might be. He doesn’t even know.
This is no different than Trump’s campaign. He never gave two turds over what he said, or who he maligned, or who he offended (other than his troll base, who cheered him for simply being a maligning, crass offender). He spoke what many were thinking, but never thought out to its logical conclusion. Trump didn’t know if he’d win, and was surprised as anyone when it happened. That’s an indictment of the left, the Democrats, and the horrible, horrible Hillary Clinton, who, with her husband, and her daughter, is Trump’s personal friend.
The impeachment offends the actual office of the President. It offends Congress, both Democrats and Republicans. It elevates blowhard hacks like Rep. Adam Schiff, who gets to conduct a Star Chamber and cause Republicans to behave like college brats occupying the dean’s office.
It’s a s**t show. But it’s Trump’s show, because he brought all this upon himself.
He would have it no other way. Trump’s presidency is art. He needs the big comeback. He wants to paint himself into a terrible cliffhanger, and have a deus ex-machina bail him out. On the issues themselves, Trump has more ears and cheers than the Democrats, who have flown the coop into the wild blue yonder of nuttiness. But the price of admission to his sane ideas is living through his opus.
His analysis has its attractions, although his antipathy towards a Democratic Party which is more or less middle of the road rather ruins it. However, I still incline towards the Russian asset theory, as it seems to be congruent with the facts we know.
Liberal Kevin Drum of Mother Jones:
Doesn’t Trump realize that the reason his allies are whining about process is because they have no defense to offer on substance? Maybe not. Maybe Trump is so delusional he actually believes that there’s some substantive defense of extorting a foreign country to smear a political rival.
Luckily for him, the rest of the Republican Party is smarter. They’ll stick to carping about the unfairness of the hearings and, in a pinch, claiming that Trump’s extortion of Ukraine is just a minor slap-on-the-wrist kind of thing, certainly nowhere near an impeachable offense.
How long will this work? If the modern Republican Party is as shameless as I think it is, forever. We’ll see.
A trifle lugubrious. Understanding the motivations of the Republican Party better might lead to an explanation for their behavior, though.
Andrew McCarthy of National Review:
The “no quid pro quo” claim is misguided because it is largely irrelevant to an impeachment inquiry. As explained in part one, we are not here talking about a criminal court prosecution in which a prosecutor must prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If a majority of the Democratic-controlled House was satisfied (or at least said they were satisfied) that an egregious abuse of power occurred, they could vote an article of impeachment even if a corrupt quid pro quo could not be proved to criminal-law specifications.
More important, the president’s camp should stick with and relentlessly argue his best point: The president’s actions in conducting Ukrainian relations do not establish an impeachable offense under the circumstances. Let’s consider the relevant issues.
McCarthy has the following points: “No harm, no foul” (laughably unethical), the Democrats didn’t give Ukraine any aid (so utterly irrelevant), “Assistance to U.S. investigations”, which frantically dances around the credible allegation that this is all about asking a foreign power to take actions damaging a political rival, “Investigating Vice President Biden’s influence over Ukraine,” for which there is no evidence of corruption, but may be the best of the bunch, “Investigating Hunter Biden and Burisma corruption,” which McCarthy admits is a problematic defense, and “The Shadow State Department,” in which he attempts to justify Rudy Guiliani’s interference with United States’ relations with Ukraine.
McCarthy has certainly mastered the art of writing authoritatively, but it seems every time I read him, he’s writing on a narrow subject beyond my expertise, or it’s impossible to take him seriously due to spinning. And I’m troubled that he doesn’t see the cumulative misdeeds of Trump as a more than adequate reason to throw Trump under the bus.
… close to 50 percent or so of the country supports impeachment and/or removal — far higher than previous polling for Nixon (until the summer of 1974, when he quit) or Clinton (ever). And the particular nature of the Trump offense — a secret attempt to pressure a foreign government to influence U.S. elections on the president’s behalf — is smack-dab in the center of the high-crime category the Founders were obsessed with. I’ve not been an impeachment fan, even as I have regarded the president as mentally ill and characteristically tyrannical from the get-go. I was long unconvinced by the Russia “collusion/conspiracy” claims, saw impeachment as inapplicable in most cases of executive wrongdoing, and only switched sides this year when evidence of obstruction of justice in the Mueller report became undeniable. But the Ukraine matter? If you were to look up an impeachable offense in a metaphorical dictionary, you’d see Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas as illustrations.
I think Sullivan sees the situation clearly, but then he’s never been a Trump or GOP fan.
Greg Fallis’ post title is all you need to know:
buy me some peanuts & impeach the motherfucker already
But Fallis almost feels sorry for Trump:
Last night he attended game five of the World Series. He’d spent most of the day being celebrated and celebrating himself for having given the order for a Delta Force team to kill or capture Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS. Clearly, he expected that celebration to continue at the ballpark.
It didn’t.
Some fans displayed a large banner reading “Impeach Trump”. A group of veterans behind home plate held up signs stating “Veterans for Impeachment.” When the park introduced some members of the military, the crowd began to cheer — but when the introduction included Comrade Trump, the cheering immediately turned to boos. Loud boos, measured at around 100 decibels. That’s just slightly less loud than a chainsaw. And if that wasn’t enough, a large segment of the crowd began chanting “Lock him up! Lock him up!”
Why would Trump, knowing, if disbelieving, polls showing his low approval ratings, think he would be universally applauded? Because he’s transactional. His latest act was a great achievement, and so now everyone should love him, that’s the transactional way.
Well, sorry. We all have memories. One good act – almost befouled by the pullout from Syria, reportedly – doesn’t make up for everything else.
Enough for now.
