By now probably everyone knows that Nancy Pelosi has called for an impeachment inquiry of President Trump and of the furor raised by a phone call Trump made to the president of the Ukraine. If you got the news in bits and pieces or laced with lots of emotional partisan rhetoric, below is a good dispassionate summary of events from The New York Times.
My view of events so far, is that the Presidents actions are troubling, but not as troubling as was the Hillary Clinton shake down of foreign governments when she served as Secretary of State and no more troubling than Biden's successful effort to get a Ukaine investigator fired who was investigating his son. In other words, Trump is kind of par for the course. Trump's actions should be exposed and disapproval expressed but his actions do not warrant impeachment.
My view of the political impact of these developments, is that it helps Trump. It shines light on the corruption of Joe Biden and his son, which harms Biden's chances of getting the Democrat nomination for president and I think Biden would have been the strongest challenger to Trump. Also, I think people will see the impeachment attempt as wasting time and a petty vindictive effort to overturn the results of an election. It will backfire. Rod
The Trump Impeachment Inquiry: What We Learned So Far Today
|
Hello, and welcome to a special edition of the Morning Briefing.
|
 |
| President Trump today.Doug Mills/The New York Times |
|
- A
call log released by the White House shows Mr. Trump pushing the
Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to consider investigating
former Vice President Joe Biden.
|
- A
Justice Department official told The Times that after a whistle-blower
raised concerns, two top intelligence officials referred the complaint
for a possible criminal investigation into the president’s actions. The
Justice Department concluded that there was no basis for a criminal
investigation into Mr. Trump’s behavior.
- In
the call, Mr. Trump alluded to American aid, while not explicitly
linking his request to unfreezing it, the document shows: “I will say
that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of
time.”
|
Click here for the reconstructed transcript.
The five-page document distributed by the White House includes a
cautionary note indicating that it was “not a verbatim transcript” but
instead was based on “notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty
officers” and national security staff. Senior administration officials
said voice recognition software was also used.
|
- Mr.
Trump urged Mr. Zelensky to investigate Mr. Biden and his younger son,
Hunter — both directly and through Rudolph Giuliani, one of Mr. Trump’s
personal lawyers. Mr. Biden is a leading candidate to be the Democratic
Party’s 2020 presidential nominee.
- As
vice president, Mr. Biden pushed the Ukrainian government in 2015 to
fire its top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, whom the U.S. and other Western
nations saw as an obstacle to reform because he failed to bring
corruption cases. At the time, Mr. Biden’s son sat on the board of a
Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings.
- Mr.
Trump and his allies have insinuated, without evidence, that Mr. Biden
was trying to protect the company from prosecution. An investigation
into him, even if it were unfounded and turned up no evidence of a
crime, could damage his campaign prospects by suggesting wrongdoing.
- The
White House froze more than $391 million in military assistance to
Ukraine this summer; it had been intended to help Ukraine defend itself
from Russian territorial aggression. Mr. Trump has given conflicting
explanations for the freeze.
- An
intelligence official filed a whistle-blower complaint last month about
the president’s actions. The inspector general for the intelligence
community deemed the complaint “credible” and “urgent” and forwarded it
to the acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, under a
law that says such complaints must be shown to Congress within a week.
- Mr.
Maguire refused to share the complaint with Congress, saying the
Justice Department disagreed with the inspector general’s conclusion
that its subject matter was covered under the law that requires
disclosing such complaints to Congress.
- The complaint’s full details remain a mystery, as does the whistle-blower’s identity.
|
- Speaker
Nancy Pelosi’s announcement on Tuesday that the House was beginning an
impeachment inquiry was momentous, but practically, it didn’t change
very much. In fact, the House Judiciary Committee had already opened a
related inquiry in July.
- Six
House committees are pursuing investigations of political malfeasance.
They will bring that evidence to the Judiciary Committee, which could
then recommended articles of impeachment to the full House.
- There’s a distinct possibility that the House, now controlled by Democrats, will vote to impeach President Trump.
- But
when the case goes to the Senate, the president has an advantage. With
the chamber under Republican control, and a two-thirds vote needed to
remove him from office, that seems unlikely to happen, at least for the
moment.
|
What are the Republicans saying?
|
Republican
lawmakers and the president stuck to their position that Mr. Trump
didn’t offer Mr. Zelensky any inducements or threaten him. “From a quid
pro quo aspect, there’s nothing there,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of
South Carolina. Some Republican leaders tried to shift attention to
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, accusing her of “trying to weaken the
president.”
|
Our top editors and reporters are ready to answer your questions about the road ahead. Ask here. |
Impeachment
does not remove a president from office; it’s more akin to an
indictment on charges of “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and
misdemeanors.” Here’s the process: |
- House
committees that are investigating the president on impeachable offenses
will send their strongest cases to the Judiciary Committee.
- If the evidence is deemed sufficient, the House holds a floor vote on one or more articles of impeachment.
- If
a majority of House members vote to impeach, the case moves to the
Senate, which holds a trial and then votes on whether to convict the
president. A two-thirds majority is required to remove the president
from office.
|
This
is only the fourth time an American president has been the subject of
an impeachment inquiry. And though two presidents have been impeached,
neither was removed from office by the Senate.
|
- Andrew
Johnson was the first president to be impeached, in 1868, over his
attempt to fire Edwin Stanton, his secretary of war, who favored a
tougher approach toward the post-Civil War South. He was acquitted by
the Senate.
- Richard
Nixon faced impeachment in 1974, on charges relating to Watergate, a
scandal that connected him to a break-in at the Democratic National
Committee headquarters and the subsequent cover-up. He resigned as it
became clear that he was about to be impeached.
- Bill
Clinton was impeached in 1998 on charges of perjury and obstruction of
justice, after it was discovered that he had lied while testifying about
his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. He was acquitted by the Senate.
Top Stories
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment