217

 

So…. I’m reading the Mueller Report. As much as blood, sweat, and tears as we’ve put into seeing this the last two and a half years you better believe I’m going to read every word.

I’m still on the collusion part-which for me is the more interesting part by far. I mean I will read the obstruction part but like Seth Abramson says we already know Trump obstructed Justice 1000 times over. The MSM has now largely accepted he obstructed Justice-it’s not really deniable. So it’s not my focus. What still needs to be drilled down and really digested is the extent of Trump’s collusion with Russia during the campaign as I covered in Chapter A yesterday.

Not just the clear coordination between Roger Stone-Jerome Corsi-Rick Gates-Paul Manafort and Trump himself-in previous chapters I’d conjectured that Manafort was who gave Stone his marching orders in the July 22 email to find out what else Assange had-Stone delegated this to Corsi who delegated it to Ted Malloch who confirmed that it would be Podesta in about October-but then there’s the fact Peter Smith expressed his clear intent to solicit a crime-the hacking of Clinton’s server by Russian hackers. The MR now confirms that Trump himself was asking his aides to get her emails-ie, hack them-steal them.

But no question the most memorable line from the MR may be from the obstruction section-where after Jeff Sessions told Trump about Mueller Trump replied: I’m fucked. That’s the end of my Presidency.’

“In the most memorable scene in the most anticipated government report in recent history, the special counsel, Robert Mueller, takes us inside the Oval Office on May 17, 2017. President Trump, having fired the F.B.I. director in an apparent effort to shut down the investigation of him and his 2016 campaign, was in the middle of interviewing candidates for the new vacancy. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had recused himself from overseeing the Russia investigation, much to the President’s fury, stepped out of the room to take a phone call. He returned with bad news: his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, had appointed Mueller to be a special counsel and conduct an independent investigation. Russiagate would live on. Trump “slumped” over in his chair, according to the report. “Oh, my God, this is the end of my Presidency,” he said. “I’m fucked.”

For now, at least, it appears that he was wrong. The appointment of Mueller did not lead to the end of Trump’s Presidency. Not yet, and probably not ever. The release of the special counsel’s report, on Thursday, showed that Mueller did not turn up conclusive evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians who interfered in the 2016 election to boost Trump’s candidacy.”

But I question Susan Glassner’s blithe assumption that it’s not the end of his ‘Presidency’ probably not ever. 

Let’s be clear it should be. That Trump wasn’t charged with a crime is a mere technicality. I mean who asked Michael Flynn to steal Hillary Clinton’s emails. Don’t tell me NO COLLUSION NO CONSPIRACY it’s clear there was just that Mueller didn’t believe he could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Even Ken Dilanian now acknowledges there was plenty of collusion. 

So Trump was right-he is fucked. Or at least he should be. But when he said this he hadn’t met Steny Hoyer.

At 12 PM Thursday April 18 just half an hour after the release of the redacted Mueller Report Hoyer-without reading a single word declared nothing to see here let’s forget about this forget about impeachment and just win in 2020. 

So Trump was wrong-he should be fucked. But he never banked on just how utterly lacking in moral courage the Dem leadership really is.

This is the same old tired canard-we’ll just impeach him in 2020. 

Again the false juxtaposition between impeaching the MFer a la Rashida Tlaib-if only she was running in 2020!-and winning the 2020 election. But this is abdication on the part of Hoyer-you want to hope that this is just him, this isn’t Pelosi’s attitude.

Again what did he see ‘to date?’ The report had been out 30 minutes- how many of the 448 pages had he and his staff read before he had that epiphany? Probably as many as the number of things war is good for: absolutely nothing. 

The reality is just like Bill Barr he was ready to exonerate the ‘President’ no matter what was in it and he just couldn’t wait, couldn’t even maintain the pretext. Hoyer also wants to exonerate Trump so the Democrats can just forget this stuff and talk about healthcare and pass bills that will never go anywhere in the Senate. That’s one of the big ironies-when you ask them about impeachment they whine about Senate math but they send other legislation every day that goes nowhere.

Indeed, that’s one of the virtues of impeachment-Mitch McConnell can put their healthcare, voting rights, or gun control bills on the shelf but he can’t do that if the House votes for impeachment. That’s the one act the House Democrats can take that McConnell actually has to answer. Yet Hoyer and friends blithely rule it out of hand.

It brings to mind critiques of much of this old guard House Dem leadership from folks like Ryan Cooper and Rick Wilson.

Here’s Ryan Cooper:

“Democrats like Neal appear to believe that the way to be “responsible” is to be timid about wielding power. But when faced with corruption like Trump’s, the actually responsible thing to do is to fight hard. Constitutional principles don’t defend themselves. It’s time for Neal and company to step up and assert themselves.”

Literally the very next day Neal did-finally-ask for Trump’s tax returns. Wether this was because he was supposedly being very disciplined and now had all his ducks in a row-as he and his defenders would claim-or because the accumulated pressure of the many posts like Cooper-starting with Hillary Clinton’s buddies at the Center for American Progress lambasting Neal’s timidity you be the judge.

Yet even though Neal did finally do the deed the next day I think Cooper’s diagnosis is on point.

Rick Wilson himself offered a similar one after the Dems rather unfocused hearing with Bill Barr:

“As usual, anyone counting on the Democrats not to blow it this week was disappointed. Democrats failed to hold Barr to any meaningful account in the hearings this week, asking questions in an oblique, diffident manner that mirrored Barr’s cool affect. They whispered when they needed to shout. They threw underhand softballs when they should have brought the heat. They were lulled into a trance, still believing they can shame the shameless or trap Barr and Trump with some kind of bluff.”

Diffident is a good word. They let him filibuster too much-there are times to interrupt someone and any hearing with Bill Barr is that time. There are some Dems who know how to do it-just watch Maxine Waters’ recent takedown of Steve Mnuchin when he got fresh-telling her to bang the gavel. 

The point is she put him in his place:

“Waters snapped back at him immediately.”

“Please do not instruct me as to how I am to conduct this committee,” she said.

Now the Dems are still insisting on questioning Bill Barr on May 2-as if there’s any value to talking to a pathological liar like him. One recommendation  that has been made is that the Dems get good lawyers to ask many of the questions and on that I couldn’t agree more. While many of the questions by the Dems for Barr were weak and banal-the answer barely mattered in many cases-the best questioner were lawyers like Hawaii’s Ed Case.

What both Cooper and Wilson bring out is that many of the Dem leaders-just aren’t at all comfortable asserting their own power. Which brings me to the title of this chapter: if the Dems punt on impeachment then I’m punting on 2020. Or I’ll write in Hillary Clinton’s name.

I mean what is the point of voting for a party that won’t even use the power we’ve given them in any meaningful way?

There was-quite rightly-a huge pushback to Hoyer.

There’s no doubt it was off message but was it a Freudian slip-ie, how all the House Dem leaders really feel?

Again no impeachment no 2020. The point is to change their incentives. Right now they look at impeachment-for some strange reason-as a hurdle to be avoided in the battle to win 2020.

So I’m changing the calculus for them-no impeachment no 2020.

All I know is that today the House Democrats are huge threat to the Rule of Law. I started this book at the end of 2017 and during much of 2018 my focus was on the obstruction of the GOP. But the GOP got routed in 2018. So they’re no longer the threat. Yes they have no spine, they have shamefully abdicated their Congressional oversight role.

But are the Democrats now doing the same? I’ve written some very tough chapters about the MSM. But now even Ken Dilanian gets it.

Now there’s no one to blame but the House Democrat leadership itself as it’s all on them. They still keep trying to outsource their responsibility.

Sean Maloney was on Joy Reid last night and he was like ‘well there’s lots of ways of holding Trump accountable’ and guess which way of doing it he wasn’t interested in? The one that he and his fellow Democrats actually have control of: impeachment. He’s willing to talk about ‘impeach him at the ballot box’ and maybe Trump could be indicted after office. Joy Reid did a pretty good job of pushing him and then he got quite rude really ‘You don’t understand me…’

I think we all understand him-he’s a craven and political and terrified of taking a stand. She pointed out that in fact the GOP didn’t pay any price for impeaching Clinton-who was, of course, unlike ‘President Trump’ very popular. Yet after impeaching Clinton they went on to win all three Houses of DC in 2000-assisted mightily by the GOP Supreme Court via Bush v. Gore its’ true-again a GOP institutionalist is a contradiction in terms.

Then Maloney actually argued that the fact that the GOP is always accusing the Democrats of wanting to impeach Trump proves it’s a bad idea. Is that how Maloney makes all his decisions-based on what Trump and Sean Hannity are saying?

Indeed, the House Dem leadership seems to be the only folks in the country who don’t realize impeachment now simply has to be on the table.

Even some who have previously been impeachment skeptics now agree:

Morning Joe admitted on Friday morning that he voted to impeach Clinton for much less than this. Former Florida
GOP Congressman David Jolly made the same point on Chris Matthews-do the Democrats really want history to judge Bill Clinton more harshly than Donald Trump?  That’s what they are effectively saying.

Yet they seem to be desperately trying to run out the clock:

You Dem leaders are so worried about 2020 nominate Brian Beutler-he’s saying what you won’t.

This is a crucial point by Beutler: it’s not only pathetic but it’s actively endangering the country. Beutler wrote his own post that brought this point into even sharper relief.

Again this is crucial as this is not a stationary position. As Yoni Applebaum has argued maladministration is an impeachable offense. But if the Dems stand down it will only embolden ‘President Trump’ and increase his maladministration.

That’s why I argue that today the biggest threat to the Rule of Law may be Steny Hoyer and Sean Maloney themselves-that whole feeble mindset.

Another canard of the impeachment-phobes a la Congressman Sean Maloney is that you can’t impeach because the Senate won’t convict. This wrongly presumes that the only benefit of impeachment is removal. But there are plenty of other reasons-protecting the country, upholding the Rule of Law and Precedent.

Brian Beutler:

“In reality, the job of persuading the public that the president needs to be impeached falls to the leaders of the House of Representatives themselves. Unlike prosecutors, they don’t infringe on anyone’s liberties by trying a case they think they might lose. Unlike prosecutors, their decision to decline warranted charges can create lasting precedents and perverse incentives. Unlike prosecutors, their trials aren’t zero-sum affairs, because trying a case well and losing can have salutary benefits for their party and the country. Going down swinging can be good politics, and set important precedents. Unlike prosecutors they can’t select their jurors, but also unlike prosecutors, they are not discouraged from trying the case in public. To the contrary, it is their obligation. And if the Mueller report makes one thing clear it’s that if Democrats fail to meet that obligation, Trump won’t be chastened—to the contrary, he will be more emboldened in his abuses of power, and the country will be in even greater danger.”

“House intelligence committee chairman Adam Schiff, who among Democrats has the best handle on the details of the Russia scandal, nevertheless echoed Hoyer Thursday saying he learned as a prosecutor, “you don’t bring a case if you don’t think you’re going to be successful just to try the case,” and thus “barring a bipartisan consensus” impeachment should be off the table. This argument has been an inducement to Republican lawlessness since Schiff first offered it last year, and it is fatally misguided. It presupposes that if press releases and headline writers don’t move public opinion on their own, then all options are exhausted. That if Republicans refuse to support the impeachment of a president who needs to be impeached, Democrats are out of options and must throw up their hands.”

About the only person in America impressed with Steny Hoyer’s comments-besides ‘President Trump’ and his GOP co-conspirators was Nate Silver.

This I don’t remotely understand. If Trump were leaving Office in 2020 the case would be better for impeachment? Why? Then Steny Hoyer would argue who cares about impeachment he’s leaving anyway, let’s run against the actual 2020  GOP nominee. The recourse then would be to just wait the 18 and 1/2 months until he leaves.

There have been polls with it closer to 50% but even 40% of the electorate supporting impeachment-note that we have still had exactly one public hearing in the 27 months since Congress opened it’s Russia investigations in January, 2017 is actually a decent number. Silver is thinking of these numbers as stationary-but by its nature an impeachment inquiry-again inquiry not one day vote-raises public support for impeachment.

In 1973 the majority of the country didn’t support Nixon’s impeachment. The hearings build the case. Those who assume Trump’s numbers are baked in are mistaken. Again one public hearing in 27 months. America just got the book and is digesting it-the redacted Mueller Report.

Next Congress has to show them the movie. Silver had a 538 post that asked is the Mueller Report a BFD?

The short answer is Silver says no. But while one day does not a trend make, the first day after the MR’s release Trump’s approval dropped three points in the daily tracking Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Only 37% now approval of him-vs. 56% disapprove-his lowest numbers of the year in this poll.

Again, one day doesn’t a trend make but this was just after the first day-when folks haven’t even fully absorbed it-which is going to probably take weeks.

But then one question you have when you look at the analysis of Silver is-why would you ever impeach any President? If you go by his analysis: after all the only way you can credibly impeach a sitting President is if his numbers dip below 30%. But in that case wouldn’t you rather run against him?

Which is why I’ve long argued that the goal isn’t impeach and removal but impeach and defeat him while the Senate is holding a trial of wether to remove him.

In truth the real problem is having the wrong focus. Silver’s a very good polling analyst. But he’s not into what he would call ‘normative judgments’ just positive judgments, so he only considers what could be politically expedient-it’s all just a conjecture anyway. I tend to agree with Beutler-I don’t believe impeaching Trump would hurt the Democrats one whit-it didn’t hurt the GOP and few agreed with impeaching Clinton-and wonder if failing to impeach Trump could actually be what hurts the Dems.

“This is not principally an argument about what constitutes sound political strategy—about what approach will galvanize whose base more. My biases tell me that impeaching Trump would inspire Democratic voters, and bog Republicans down with endless recitations of their party’s hideous corruption. My biases tells me that running scared from the impeachment question would deflate many Democratic activists, by signaling to them that the party doesn’t really consider Trump’s presidency to be an emergency after all, and will refuse to hold his regime accountable for its crimes even if the next election goes well. But that could be wrong.”

Well it clearly will deflate me-I’ve stated I won’t vote in 2020 if they don’t impeach the MFer and you’re talking to a life long Democrat who has voted Democrat all my adult life-I’ve never missed an election. It is disappointing to see how blase the Steny Hoyers and the Sean Maloneys are about Trump-they don’t see him as a threat at all, he’s just one more candidate to beat-they utterly lack perspective.

But Beutler also hits the right note here-political calculus is the wrong lens for impeachment. Again what impeachment skeptics like Silver and the House leadership can’t explain is why the Founders gave Congress the impeachment power at all-after all why not just vote him out next time?

Because just winning in 2020-presuming it won’t demoralize the base which I think it will-won’t expunge the Office. It will codify Trump’s illegitimacy in gaining the Office, and his authoritarianism and obstruction while in it.

Greg Sargent makes the same point:

In other words the only way to have this debate is on the ground not of political expediency-which is nothing but rank speculation anyway as to what you think the political effects could be-but of principle. The case for impeaching or not impeaching this MFer should be made on principled grounds.

None other than Joe Walsh makes the same point.

As has Never Trump GOPer George Conway

Abraham Lincoln anticipated all equivocations and the canards of today’s unprincipled Dem leadership.

UPDATE:

And-finally-one actual elected Democrat has gotten it-Elizabeth Warren.

That’s the real key. Just beating him in 2020 without impeaching him normalizes everything he’s done.

She was on Rachel Maddow and she didn’t blink when Maddow asked her if the Dems should impeach even if the Senate doesn’t convict: her answer was: absolutely.

Jonathan Chait made a very good point on Lawrence O’Donnell last night-the conventional wisdom that this is bad politically is pretty dubious. It clearly has helped Warren politically-and I suspect will continue to.

https://twitter.com/iamideclair/status/1119355375919091712?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1119355375919091712&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fevilsax.pressbooks.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost.php%3Fpost%3D7198%26action%3Dedit

https://twitter.com/MichaellW56/status/1119363775730155520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1119363775730155520&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fevilsax.pressbooks.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost.php%3Fpost%3D7198%26action%3Dedit

No one tell Nate Silver that-he’s happy believing that no one wants to impeach Trump.

Note though that Castro’s answer is more equivocal. It would be perfectly reasonable to-but you get a vote Congressman. Why not do an Elizabeth Warren and say not only is it reasonable but that Congress must do so?

Eric Swalwell followed Warren on Maddow and he was also somewhat equivocal.

https://twitter.com/MsKadyCee/status/1118997352226934784?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1118997352226934784&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fevilsax.pressbooks.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost.php%3Fpost%3D7198%26action%3Dedit

And he’s on both the Judiciary and Intel so we need him to be having this conversation with Nadler and Schiff-who’s a great guy and understands the gravity of what Trump has done and the threat better than anyone in Congress yet still wants to give Mitch McConnell a veto.

If you’ve read this book you know by now I’m a big fan of Kamala Harris. But I have to say this is a big shot in the arm for Warren-she has made me sit up and take notice.

https://twitter.com/Blaq3G/status/1119388945928867840

This is the beauty of her of all people coming out for impeachment-no one can accuse her of ‘caring only about taking down ‘President Trump’-she has by far the most and best policies of any candidate.

I would advise Kamala Harris, Eric Swalwell, and friends to jump in-the water’s fine. But no matter what else, Warren was first and her simple expression of principle will be remembered.

Other Dem candidates should fire their consultant telling them ‘this will backfire I tell you, backfire!’ and talk about the Rule of Law and the need to vote their conscience.

And they may to their shock discover voting their conscience is also smart politics. 

“On impeachment, Warren just stole the show from her dodging Democratic rivals”

“Analysis: The Massachusetts senator’s forceful call to begin the process of removing Trump set her apart from the crowded primary field.”

UPDATE: I’ve now decided I’m going to donate to Warren. 

Done-the water’s warm, the more the merrier.

UPDATE 2.0: To paraphrase Sheryl Crow I’ve got a feeling I’m not the only one. 

https://twitter.com/Blessed2befreee/status/1119621455715557377

Listen one overarching theme of this book is that the Democrats need to stop allowing themselves to be second class citizens. In Chapter B I discussed Jess Zimmerman’s perspicacious post that argued persuasively that the Democratic party is a girl.

“Why Can’t Democrats Get Angry?”

“I think it’s because our misogynistic society has pushed them into the same corner women have been forced into. But there’s a way out.”

This is a very good point-when you talk about gender in politics the dividing line isn’t just male vs female politicians but Republican vs. Democratic politicians. The same rules against aggression and anger for women attaches to both male and female Democratic politicians.

As for anger the GOP was full of righteous outrage over a fake email scandal and now the Democrats can’t even get mad at having an election stolen from them.

I mean what Mueller documented was stunning. The Trump campaign and Russia colluded in hacking the DNC, the DCCC, and the party’s nominee, Hillary Clinton. The DNC leaks-which Trump personally knew about-were timed perfectly for the first day of their convention forcing the DNC Chairwoman to resign.

The very night Trump called out to Russia: Russia, if you’re listening, the hackers attempted to hack Clinton’s personal office for the first time.

Yet Steny Hoyer, Sean Maloney, so many of the Democrats are so blase about this. Goddamn it this was done to you-the attack of the Russians was specifically a broad and deep attack on the Democratic party. Where’s the outrage?

But they simply don’t personalize it-when they should. Remember that Biff from Back to the Future-‘why don’t you make like a tree and go away-was based on ‘President Trump.’

I think much of the Dems’ attitude towards Trump seems to be premised on the maxim-if you get down into the pit with pigs you both get dirty and the pig likes it.

They presume Trump’s despicable behavior speaks for itself. And I think its’ true-the American people hate bullies. But the corollary is they don’t respect doormats. They don’t respect McFly who hands over his lunch money to Biff every day to avoid a beatdown.

In all the great American movies and novels the hero only becomes a hero when he finally stand up to Biff and punches him in the mouth.

Chris Rock also made a very perspicacious comment-Trump is President because no one knows how to fight a bully anymore.

In other words no one knows how to fight back. The Dem leaders seem to think their best offense is a weak kneed defense-they walk away with Biff’s spittle running down their chin.

This is why I miss Harry Reid-nothing against Chuck Schumer-but Reid got angry, he hated the GOP enemy. Hillary got it too-they respect only strength.

There are a few divides in today’s Democratic House.

While the old fogeys waffle so many of the young freshman seem to instinctively get it.

Neither does AOC fall for the canard of Sean Maloney and Friends that you can’t impeach without Mitch McConnell’s ok-which would mean never.

Amen-neither Senate Math nor Political Calculus are admissible-just on the principle-has Trump committed impeachable offenses or not?

If so they must impeach regardless of the SM or the PC.

AOC really could teach her elders a great deal.-while the GOP has an entire Junta against her she pushes back and calls them out. AOC is about as substantive in terms of policy goals as you can get-#TheGreenNewDeal-yet she doesn’t use this as an excuse to hand Biff her lunch money so as not to make a scene or have Chuck Todd accuse her of being ‘just as bad as Trump.’

In all fairness, it isn’t only the young who get it-Auntie Maxine is one of the best Dem fighters out there. She never allows herself to get bullied.

Do some of the Dem leadership not understand there’s a difference between being a bully and defending yourself?

Then we have Senator Warren’s courageous stand. And as always we have Congressman Al Green.

Yet Steny Hoyer doesn’t think that-he also agrees that if Trump shot someone on 5th Avenue it’s ok-no need to impeach him just win next time.

This is why I have to warn my party-if they put on impeachment I’m punting on 2020. Unless Elizabeth Warren is the nominee.

As for Jess Zimmerman’s idea that the party is a a girl, the Dems remind me in many ways of that woman many of us know-a friend, a love one-who is being abused by her own husband. Her name is: the Democratic Party and his name is: the Republican Party.

You do everything you can to support her, protect her, etc, but at some point you figure out that she’s complicit in her own abuse and your support isn’t actually helping her.

What do you do then if you’re a true friend? Disengage with her as you are only making it worse.

That’s why if the Dems punt on impeachment I’m not voting for them in 2020. Doing so will only make it worse.

UPDATE: We don’t want to not vote for the Dems-I love our party. So lets’ warn them now and spend the next 19 months forewarning them so this is not necessary.

UPDATE 2.0:

UPDATE 3.0:

UPDATE 4.0:

Look I don’t agree with AOC on everything by any stretch-I’m not a ‘democratic socialist’-really hate the term-and agree that the Green New Deal is more aspirational than anything-which is not to say that aspiration doesn’t have an important place. But I really wish Pelosi spent as much time attacking ‘President Trump’ as AOC. 

It’s almost like she thinks impeaching AOC would be worth it. 

UPDATE 5.0:

I’m really curious how many of the MSMers warning against impeaching ‘President Trump’ were all in on impeaching Clinton?

Andrew Sullivan gets it right-it’s the consequences of not impeaching Trump that are truly dire.

As does-of course-Cheri Jacobus-who is almost always right!

UPDATE 6.0: Then there’s the canard that you can either impeach or win 2020-why not do both?

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book