I have long defended Nancy Pelosi on the grounds that she’s a shrewd and effective legislator. I’ve been reminded lately, ruefully, that that isn’t the entirety of the job. And here, she’s just failing the republic itself:
“Trump is goading us to impeach him,” she said at an event in New York City hosted by the Cornell University Institute of Politics and Global Affairs. “That’s what he’s doing. Every single day, he’s just like taunting, taunting, taunting because he knows that it would be very divisive in the country, but he doesn’t really care. He just wants to solidify his base.”
By way of context: Some 370 710 and (counting) former Federal DOJ prosecutors said that Trump would be indicted for obstruction of justice, were he not excluded from that by the DOJ itself – leaving that decision up to Congress.
Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.
The Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming. These include:
· The President’s efforts to fire Mueller and to falsify evidence about that effort;
· The President’s efforts to limit the scope of Mueller’s investigation to exclude his conduct; and
· The President’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators probing him and his campaign.
I have so many questions for Pelosi, and for any House Democrat:
- Why are we giving Trump’s base veto power over what the House does?
- Should we be giving political calculations this much consideration? How does she, or Trump, know how this will affect the 2020 elections?
- As long as politics enters into it: What about the Democratic base? Will failure to act depress Democratic turnout, since Democrats aren’t really fighting for us (“Us” in the broadest possible sense) anyway?
- Shall GOP Senators not be held to account for having to defend rampant obstruction of justice? Do we merely take their intransigence for granted — that they’re just scorpions, it’s in their nature, and they’re immune to public pressure?
- How can the Democratic Party claim to stand against corruption when they allow it to happen without using the tools at its disposal?
- Why not just do the principled thing, when obstruction of justice is this obvious, this harmful, and such a terrible precedent?
The difficulty of all this is that the GOP has aligned itself with a pure lawlessness, power for its own sake. There are no principles, no rules: Only we-win and you-lose. Trump is a symptom as well as an agent of this. If you stand against corruption, for the rule of law, for democracy itself, by definition that is now a partisan act. And that is uncomfortable. It wish it were not so. But it’s where we are. Of course the President will use this to gin up his base. But also every GOP Senator and Rep must be held to account for his corruption, since they have yoked themselves to him so thoroughly and abjectly. It is indeed a political process; I don’t see how it’s one where the GOP gets off lightly.
We often imagine in Massachusetts that because our reps are “good”, there’s nothing we can do to affect the national conversation beyond that. This is different: There is a role for Massachusetts Democrats to play. I’m going to call my rep Katherine Clark and try to get a statement. Maybe call your rep and ask what they’re doing.
fredrichlariccia says
I agree with Senator Warren that it is time for Congress to live up to their sworn oath ‘to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic” and begin impeachment in the House based on the Mueller report findings on obstruction of justice.
SomervilleTom says
This is pretty much exactly the scenario where I was confident that Mike Capuano would be playing a major and effective role.
I know that Ayanna Pressley (my rep) is already on-board with beginning the impeachment process. I don’t know what she’s doing about that.
I’m not trying criticize Ms. Pressley. I’m instead saying that I wish we were hearing more from her. This is a REALLY GOOD time to be fighting hard, loud, and tough do the right thing.
SomervilleTom says
If impeachment hearings haven’t begun by the 2020 election, I won’t vote. I can’t imagine a more effective way to drive Democratic voters — especially younger voters — out of the process than to continue this mealy-mouthed resistance to impeachment.
This is kind of thing that makes me look at emigrating to Canada.
fredrichlariccia says
Trumpism is a cancer on our Constitution. It must be cut out and relegated to the dustbin of history.
petr says
Trump didn’t expect to win. He may not have even wanted to win. This isn’t about ‘Trumpism.’ It is about some subset of the voters who will vote worse than the cancer. They will remain when ‘Trumpism’ is in the dustbin…
Christopher says
“There is no good or evil – only power, and those too weak to seek it.”
Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
fredrichlariccia says
George Orwell nailed Trumpism in 1984 : “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
fredrichlariccia says
“There is a point when caution becomes cowardice and cowardice becomes betrayal.” Harvard law professor and Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe
jconway says
Here’s the dilemma. It’s the right thing to do and a political loser.
It’s a political loser because it does jeopardize the middle of the road House seats the Dems just picked up. They didn’t do it calling for impeachment but calling for civility, action on health care, infrastructure, and action on climate. There are sizeable numbers of persuadable Romney-Clinton-Dem 18 and Romney-Trump-Dem 18’ voters turned off by Trump who aren’t ready for impeachment. I think it’s more than reasonable for Pelosi to keep this in mind in her deliberations.
That said, Barr has clearly acted improperly and the last minute invocation if executive privilege is exactly the kind of move a guilty president makes. Impeachment may be right for the country and wrong for the Democratic Party. How to resolve this dilemma is beyond my pay grade, but Warren lays out a strong blueprint for action sooner rather than later.
Christopher says
I have come to be persuaded by Warren’s argument that the Constitution contains no political inconvenience exception. I’ve also seen it noted several times recently that the public did not support impeaching Nixon when those hearings first started either.
betsey says
But we can walk and chew gum at the same time. What choice do we have now? As Rep. Nadler just said in his presser, “We are now in a constitutional crisis“. We should all be out in the streets protesting. Our democracy is dying right before our eyes, so the last thing we should worried about is political inconvenience!
petr says
Sweet sonny Jesus and his sufferin in-laws! Will you listen to yourself?
When the ‘right thing to do’ is a ‘political loser’ then politics is comprehensively broken. Busted. Of no use to man or beast. Useless. Good policy is always and forever good politics. If it ain’t, then some mouth-breathing retard (I’m looking at you Mitch McConnell) has gone and defined ‘good politics’ out of existence.
Don’t play that game. If you play that game, then asking the question “Is anyone going to save the Republic?” is a chump question: there won’t be a republic worth saving at that point.
petr says
I’m with Pelosi on this: taking an extraordinary step like impeachment is an important and consequential decision. It should not be undertaken for light or transient reasons. It should be undertaken as part of a soul-searing process.
That you find the outcome obvious doesn’t mean the process doesn’t have to be undertaken.