An Article of Impeachment Against Donald Trump

[jserraglio]

The New York Times
January 28, 2018
Opinion
By David Leonhardt

There are good reasons to be wary of impeachment talk. Congressional Republicans show zero interest, and they’re the ones in charge. Democrats, for their part, need to focus on retaking Congress, and railing about impeachment probably won’t help them win votes.

But let’s set aside realpolitik for a few minutes and ask a different question: Is serious consideration of impeachment fair? I think the answer is yes. The evidence is now quite strong that Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice. Many legal scholars believe a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime. So the proper remedy for a president credibly accused of obstructing justice is impeachment.

The first article of impeachment against Richard Nixon argued that he had “prevented, obstructed and impeded the administration of justice.” One of the two impeachment articles that the House passed against Bill Clinton used that identical phrase. In both cases, the article then laid out the evidence with a numbered list. Nixon’s version had nine items. Clinton’s had seven. Each list was meant to show that the president had intentionally tried to subvert a federal investigation.

Given last week’s news — that Trump has already tried to fire Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating the Trump campaign — it’s time to put together the same sort of list for Trump. Of course, this list is based only on publicly available information. Mueller, no doubt, knows more.

1. During a dinner at the White House on Jan. 27, 2017, Trump asked for a pledge of “loyalty” from James Comey, then the F.B.I. director, who was overseeing the investigation of the Trump campaign.

2. On Feb. 14, Trump directed several other officials to leave the Oval Office so he could speak privately with Comey. He then told Comey to “let this go,” referring to the investigation of Michael Flynn, who had resigned the previous day as Trump’s national security adviser.

3. On March 22, Trump directed several other officials to leave a White House briefing so he could speak privately with Daniel Coats, the director of national intelligence, and Mike Pompeo, the C.I.A. director. Trump asked them to persuade Comey to back off investigating Flynn.

4. In March and April, Trump told Comey in phone calls that he wanted Comey to lift the ”cloud” of the investigation.

5. On May 9, Trump fired Comey as F.B.I. director. On May 10, Trump told Russian officials that the firing had “taken off” the “great pressure” of the Russia investigation. On May 11, he told NBC News that the firing was because of “this Russia thing.”

6. On May 17, shortly after hearing that the Justice Department had appointed Mueller to take over the Russia investigation, Trump berated Jeff Sessions, the attorney general. The appointment had caused the administration again to lose control over the investigation, and Trump accused Sessions of “disloyalty.”

7. In June, Trump explored several options to retake control. At one point, he ordered the firing of Mueller, before the White House counsel resisted.

8. On July 8, aboard Air Force One, Trump helped draft a false public statement for his son, Donald Trump Jr. The statement claimed that a 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer was about adoption policy. Trump Jr. later acknowledged that the meeting was to discuss damaging information the Russian government had about Hillary Clinton.

9. On July 26, in a tweet, Trump called for the firing of Andrew McCabe, the F.B.I.’s deputy director, a potential corroborating witness for Comey’s conversations with Trump. The tweet was part of Trump’s efforts, discussed with White House aides, to discredit F.B.I. officials.

10. Throughout, Trump (and this quotation comes from the Nixon article of impeachment) “made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States.” Among other things, Trump repeatedly made untruthful statements about American intelligence agencies’ conclusions regarding Russia’s role in the 2016 election.

Obstruction of justice depends on a person’s intent — what legal experts often call “corrupt intent.” This list is so damning because it reveals Trump’s intent.

He has inserted himself into the details of a criminal investigation in ways that previous presidents rarely if ever did. (They left individual investigations to the attorney general.) And he has done so in ways that show he understands he’s doing something wrong. He has cleared the room before trying to influence the investigation. He directed his son to lie, and he himself has lied.

When the framers were debating impeachment at the Constitutional Convention, George Mason asked: “Shall any man be above justice?”

The same question faces us now: Can a president use the power of his office to hold himself above the law? Trump is unlikely to face impeachment anytime soon, or perhaps anytime at all. But it’s time for all of us — voters, members of Congress, Trump’s own staff — to be honest about what he’s done. He has obstructed justice.

He may not be finished doing so, either.

- — -

A version of this article appears in print on January 29, 2018, on Page A21 of the New York edition with the headline: An Article of Impeachment Against Trump.

[lennygoran]

He has obstructed justice.

Absolutely! Regards, Len

[jserraglio]

"Twinkle in his eye, larceny in his soul"—so writes Michael Wolff in his stunning book, portraying Donald as a latter-day Henry VIII. "I now understand," quoth Bannon, "what it is like to be in the court of the Tudors."

Assuming the book to be only 10% accurate, our country would still be in sheepdip up to the eyebrows.

This great opera dormant won't be over till the fat man sings.

[lennygoran]

This great opera dormant won't be over till the fat man sings.

The fat man sings-more to the point he has to wind up in Sing Sing or some other prison! Now we have the opera "The Memo." Talk about opera Trump and Nunez remind me of Scarpia and Spoletta. Regards, Len

[jbuck919]

"Twinkle in his eye, larceny in his soul"—so writes Michael Wolff in his stunning book, portraying Donald as a latter-day Henry VIII. "I now understand," quoth Bannon, "what it is like to be in the court of the Tudors."

Assuming the book to be only 10% accurate, our country would still be in sheepdip up to the eyebrows.

This great opera dormant won't be over till the fat man sings.

This flatters Henry VIII, who is pretty hard to flatter.

[jserraglio]

This flatters Henry VIII, who is pretty hard to flatter.

Donald though is pretty easy to flatter, and his appetites are more anarchic than Henry's ever were.

Other members of the Court are as follows:
Fred Trump (Henry Tudor)
Steve Bannon (Wolsey) - In Woolf's book, Bannon calls himself Thomas Cromwell.
John Kelly (Thomas Cromwell)
Jim Comey (Thomas More)
Melania (Jane Seymour)
Ivanka (Elizabeth I)
Kushner (Essex).

Oops, I forgot Holbein (Michael Woolf).

[lennygoran]

Oops, I forgot Holbein (Michael Woolf).

You forgot Donizetti-he covered these people well-still he never imagined there'd be a Nunez memo! Regards, Len

[jserraglio]

You forgot Donizetti-he covered these people well-still he never imagined there'd be a Nunez memo! Regards, Len

Spicer was wrong. You can make this shite up.

[lennygoran]

You can make this shite up.

Yes Donizetti knew how to make stuff up-that's what makes his operas on the subject so great! OTOH the stuff Trump makes up will definitely not make America great. Regards, Len

[jserraglio]

Yes Donizetti knew how to make stuff up-that's what makes his operas on the subject so great! OTOH the stuff Trump makes up will definitely not make America great.

Sorry, Woolf puts Donizetti in the shade. His book, masterful political portraiture, makes for luscious reading. Whoever let that guy sit in the WH lobby should be racked and screwed!

[jbuck919]

Every US president after maybe George Washington could have been called up on articles of impeachment. Heck, the US was founded on de facto trumped-up (so to speak) notions against "the present king of Great Britain," who is not mentioned by name in the Declaration of Independence. (Try that for an Academic Bowl question.) It is one of the few ways to get rid of the bastard. Pure murder has worked four times, and been tried many more. The two cases of real impeachment were bogus, though Bill Clinton can be accused of having brought it on himself. You want to get rid of Trump and what he represents? Plan on living to at least the age of 200.

[jserraglio]

Every US president after maybe George Washington could have been called up on articles of impeachment.

Other presidents have committed impeachable offenses.

So what happens if I tell the cop that pulls me over: "those drivers are speeding too"? He's supposed to let me go with a warning and chase them, right?

[lennygoran]

You want to get rid of Trump and what he represents? Plan on living to at least the age of 200.

This very pessimistic statement depresses me greatly-I'll definitely play Donizetti tonight while in the kitchen! He knew how to get rid of people! Regards, Len

[jbuck919]

You want to get rid of Trump and what he represents? Plan on living to at least the age of 200.

This very pessimistic statement depresses me greatly-I'll definitely play Donizetti tonight while in the kitchen! He knew how to get rid of people! Regards, Len

I'd recommend L'élisir d'amoré.

[lennygoran]

I'd recommend L'élisir d'amoré.

Why--he doesn't get rid of anyone in that opera? Do you think if I took some of that elixir handed out in L'élisir d'amoré I could warm up to Trump-no way after listening to his babbling speech today down at The Greenbrier? Regards, Len

[jbuck919]

I'd recommend L'élisir d'amoré.

Why--he doesn't get rid of anyone in that opera? Do you think if I took some of that elixir handed out in L'élisir d'amoré I could warm up to Trump-no way after listening to his babbling speech today down at The Greenbrier? Regards, Len

I was thinking of diversion, which is pretty much all we have left in the hope that reality does not catch up to us before we die.

[lennygoran]

I was thinking of diversion, which is pretty much all we have left in the hope that reality does not catch up to us before we die.

Thanks, well I do hope to get some nice diversion very soon down in Florida-sunshine, temps in the 60's, gardens, shores, wildlife-maybe a return to the Dali museum-even his surrealism can't match what's going on in Washington DC though. Regards, Len