There is plenty of material, and each, or each category--emoluments, obstruction of investigations, violating rules on disclosure (both personal and administrative disclosures), failure to maintain the function of government agencies, disregarding appropriations law, failing to protect the integrity of American elections-- should be framed in a separate count discussed, at length, on the House floor. Let's see if Republicans have his back on behavior they have often condemned already.
A rider to it should censure his toady Attorney General William Barr for intentionally deceiving the public and Congress on the contents of the Mueller report and his testimony about it.
A censure motion would pass--it will be very interesting to see if any Republicans vote in favor of any of the counts, or the motion itself--and it will be dismissed by Trump, probably publicly so (because he has no sense of shame or sensitivity at all); however, it will not be meaningless. A censure motion states unambiguously that the behavior described is unacceptable.
The other question is whether to impeach the President for abuse of his office. In order to do this, a lot more information is needed, information that is going to be very difficult and time-consuming to extract from the Administration. The debate on the censure motion would help guide how broad the potential articles of impeachment should be composed.
Today's thrust forward by Speaker Pelosi is on a single, narrow violation: Trump seeking Ukrainian President Velensky to "collude" with him in interference with the upcoming election, and refusing to allow the release of the whistleblower report to Congress. It may not be enough, in itself, especially when the White House finally releases the report to Congress, after spinning it as much as is humanly possible.
Obviously, I support Pelosi's action and her tactics, as well. I rise to suggest that there is another option; that beginning the inquiry does not lead necessarily to impeachment (and subsequent failure to convict) , and that there is a way to shame the President, publicly and definitively, without falling immediately into that trap.
Censure completed this fall allows the court processes, etc. to continue, all the way through the election.
In my view, this does not change the order of the ways in which Drumpfenreich comes to an end (see below, from a May, 2018 post), though I am thinking "suicide in the bunker" might end up being part of the rankings.
End of Trumpism--the Headline(as I would rank order on likelihood)
1. Trump Defeated! ( in the 2020 Election)
2. Trump Quits! (Before 2020)
3. Trump Dies! (anytime OK)
4. Trump Announces He Will Not Run Again (most likely in early 2020, when the recession hits)
5. Trump Wins Re-Election, Civilization Crashes, Drumpfsterfire Blazes until Snuffed in Resulting Chaos... (I'd guess late 2022)
6. Trump Is Impeached and Convicted! (could even be in second term)
7. That 25th Amendment Coup-because-Trump-is-Crazy Thing! (Since it didn't already happen...)
Trump did go too far this time, though he was understandably emboldened by the outcome of the Mueller report, which was contemporaneous with the egregious phone call with Ukraine. One thing I heard tonight which bothers me is that I heard one analyst saying that this scandal would imperil the vital military aid to Ukraine--that must not happen.
Posts
2 comments:
The part about releasing the whistleblower complaint (to Congress) was announced within minutes of posting this.
One thing I should have made clear: censure, unlike impeachment, can be completed by the House, without the Senate. It can be reversed by later vote of the House, but otherwise is part of the permanent record of the Congress.
Sept. 27: Obviously they're not going to wait and investigate much before they aim their impeachment shot at Trump. Too bad--I'm actually one of those that thinks it makes more sense to drag it out rather than shoot, miss, and move on to the campaigning.
Post a Comment