Democracy Under Attack

Following his Impeachment Trial, Mr. Donald J. Trump became predictably vengeful and embarked on a revenge tour.  He is now systematically using the power of the presidency to invoke his personal wrath on anyone that did not faithfully and fully support him — personally — rather than doing their duty and supporting their oath to the Constitution.  The purge will only end when the Trump regime is fully stocked with Trump loyalists, regardless of their ability to handle the job, personal background, or knowledge of anything related to the job.  For the most part, expect it to be the “B Team” — or maybe more like “F Troop.”

Mr. Trump is taking another page out of the Autocracy 101 text book.  We should not be surprised.

Recently, I was referred to an article in the New York Review of Books by Masha Gessen.  Titled Autocracy: Rules for Survival it provides six rules based on living much of her life in autocracies and becoming an expert on Russia’s Vladimir Putin.  Ms. Gessen is much better at explaining herself than I could ever be — it is worth the time to read the original — and her November 2016 article is stunningly prescient in predicting Mr. Trump’s behavior in the years following his election.

In brief, these are the six rules.

  1. Believe the autocrat.  They always tell you exactly what they are going to do.  Mr. Trump exhibits this behavior.  What some consider to be exaggeration, hyperbole or “Trump being Trump” is actually him telling you what he is going to do.  Or at least what he wants to do if he can figure out a way to get away with it.  I first observed this trait in Gulf War I where I was involved in a group tasked with the formulation of a policy and a strategy to get Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait and to restore a semblance of order in the Gulf region.  With study, it became obvious that he was telling the world exactly what he intended to do — or what he would try to do — but you had to peel away the bombastic language to fully understand what he was saying.
  2. Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.  When things seem out of control, the smallest sense of normality tends to soothe people’s concerns.  We all need reassurances.  When things are at their worst, anything that makes it seem as if the situation is temporary and that it will all be okay in the end is a salve that may hide the wound rather than heal it.  What is happening today in our country is not normal.  No one-off State of the Union speech or any other glimmer of normal presidential behavior should mask the fact that 99% of the time our president is out of control.
  3. Institutions will not save you.  American values are based on ideas like a free press, an independent judiciary, Congressional oversight of the Executive Branch and leaders within the government protecting the Constitution for all Americans.  It takes about two seconds to recall that Mr. Trump fires anyone that stands up to him, constantly debases members of the media, attacks judges that do not do want he wants, and always succeeds in getting the formerly Republican members of Congress to acquiesce to his every whim.  Mr. Trump and his regime took a steam roller to the established norms of government and continue to test the limits of the law in every corner of government.  There are no longer any safety barriers keeping the regime within safe boundaries.
  4. Be outraged.  While many of us may no longer be surprised by statements and actions from Mr. Trump, one needs to continue to be shocked.  Do not normalize bad behavior especially when it threatens the fabric of our democracy.  Be prepared for ridicule when continuing to call out such awful behavior while others continue with their mantra that it is just Trump being Trump.  As he himself calls it when belittling those that critique him, be prepared for accusations of suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome.  Be prepared for unpleasant attacks from his most ardent supporters.  Do not back off.
  5. Don’t make compromises.  So many former Republicans, especially in the Senate, predicted that Mr. Trump as president would be the worst thing that ever happened to our country.  After three years of his presidency they are now his most loyal and fervent supporters.  Their support is not necessarily a re-evaluation of his competency or ability or vision, but rather it is a compromise of their own values in order to retain power.  Mr. Trump is no different than the person they ardently decried during the campaign.  Those around him have changed.
  6. Remember the future.  Mr. Trump, his regime, and Trumpism cannot last forever.  Look to reform our institutions in order to restore the foundations of our democracy.  Put into law what we as a country previously took to be accepted norms of behavior that our leaders would honor.  Work to project a new vision for our country that is inclusive and that addresses the problems that Mr. Trump was able to cynically manipulate for his own purposes.  Stay in the game.

In the every day course of our own lives it is possible to lose sight of the big picture attack on our democracy.  It’s hard.  Frankly, it’s exhausting.  It is easy to lose oneself in areas outside of politics because it is just so relentlessly Trump.  Every gosh darn day there is some new Tweet or speech or rally that saps all of the energy from one’s soul when it is clear that he has no idea what he is talking about.  Nearly 17,000 documented and provable lies during his presidency numbs the soul and becomes normalized.

And that is the plan.

Autocracy thrives on indifference or exhaustion or just turning it over to the regime and letting them take care of it all as long as my day-to-day life is not impacted.  Mr. Trump and his regime are interested only in themselves and in the amassing of personal power.  Period.  Anything else is a sales pitch presented in the moment to get a cheer or to attack an opponent or to appear to care.  Remember that fundamentally, they don’t care about you or me or the rule of law.  Only themselves.

It is up to us as citizens to stay vigilant and to call out the fouls when we see them.

 


Frightening

“I believe that the president has learned from this case.  The president has been impeached — that’s a pretty big lesson.”   — Senator Susan Collins (Tr-Maine)

Multiple Senators opined in a similar way that Mr. Trump learned his lesson as to the seriousness of his actions concerning Ukraine and that he would be more reserved and conventional in his approach to governing in the future.

Ha!

When asked by a reporter about Senator Collins’ statement, specifically, what lessons he’s learned from the impeachment, Mr. Trump responded:

“That the Democrats are crooked.  They’ve got a lot of crooked things going.  That they’re vicious.  That they shouldn’t have brought impeachment.  And that my poll numbers are ten points higher.”

It has only been a little over a week since the Impeachment Trial of Donald John Trump concluded.  In that time, Mr. Trump embarked on a crusade of retribution and increasingly threatening behavior.  The list is too long — in just nine days mind you — to enumerate here but it started with the National Prayer Breakfast, continued in a rambling and profane State of Mind speech in the White House, and is clearly enumerated in his omnipresent Tweet storms.  It is, in a word, frightening.

Of greatest concern to our Republic is his stated intent to meddle in the Justice system of the United States of America.  Our legal system depends on the ability of our prosecutors, judges and juries to attempt to be as impartial as possible.  As with Joe Friday in the old “Drag Net” series, “just the facts, Ma’am.”  Just as important is the public’s perception that the system is unbiased and faithful to the law.  Mr. Trump is attempting to undercut both elements that are so important to our rule of law.

We got a preview of coming attractions a few weeks ago when the DOJ initially asked for a relatively long prison sentence (seven months) for confessed felon Mr. Michael Flynn.  That was later withdrawn and a recommendation for probation was substituted after the original career prosecutors were over-ruled by senior political appointee DOJ officials.

In case you missed it, Mr. Trump’s long time friend and confidant — and proud self proclaimed political dirty trickster — Mr. Roger Stone was convicted on seven felony counts including lying to Congress and witness tampering.  His is the last case to come from the Mueller Investigation which resulted in multiple defendants going to jail on convictions or admissions of guilt.

Mr. Stone is due to be sentenced next week.  This week the four career prosecutors from the Department of Justice (DOJ) used the existing formula under current law to recommend a sentence for Mr. Stone.  Prosecutors recommend a sentence, based on the guidelines, and then judges hand down the sentence based on those same guidelines coupled with any mitigating or aggravating circumstances and other factors that may have come out during the trial or that are presented by the defense attorneys in order to humanize the guidelines.

The DOJ prosecutors recommended in a brief presented to the court that Mr. Stone serve seven to nine years in jail.  That night, the president tweeted at two A.M. that “This is a horrible and very unfair situation.  The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them.  Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!”  Later that day, under the direction of Attorney General William Barr, the court papers were withdrawn and a lighter sentence was put forward by DOJ.  Mr. Trump later publicly questioned whether there was “prosecutorial misconduct” in the case under the original prosecutors.

The four original career prosecutors resigned in protest.  Three resigned from the case and one from the case and from DOJ.

It gets worse.  As it always does with Mr. Trump.

The president then went after the presiding judge in the case on Twitter.  He went after Judge Amy Berman Jackson a judge in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.  She is a highly respected member of the judiciary known for her fairness and lack of tolerance for shenanigans in the court room.  Oh by the way, she also was the judge in other prosecutions brought forward by Mr. Mueller including Mr. Paul Manafort and Mr. Richard Gates.  It was the sentencing of Mr. Manafort that particularly incensed the president, which he brought up in his latest attack on Judge Jackson.

It gets worse, as it always does.

The president then went after the forewoman of the jury that convicted Mr. Stone.  On Twitter, of course, he said of the forewoman, “Now it looks like the fore person in the jury, in the Roger Stone case, had significant bias.  Add that to everything else, and this is not looking good for the “Justice” Department.”  He then referenced “Fox and Friends” on Fox News.  Of course he did.  And of course he puts “justice” in quotations.

It gets worse, again.

Yesterday AG Barr, in what appeared to me to be a “CYA” (an old term — known in modern circles as damage control mode), held an interview with ABC News where he opined that the president’s Tweets were making it “impossible” for him to do his job.  To me, it looked like the AG was trying to tell Mr. Trump that he was taking care of the president and following up on his desired use of the Justice Department for his own purposes, but that the Tweets were giving away the ball game.  Basically, to me, he was saying to the president, “Cool it.  We’ve got your back but we can’t do it if you brag about it.  Just stop it.”

But no matter.  The president just — Could. Not. Let. It. Be.

Today the president says that he has “the legal right” to interfere in cases brought by the Justice Department.  Let that sink in for a minute.

Not only is he claiming that he can interfere in the prosecution proceedings against his friends and allies, but that he can direct the prosecution of his perceived enemies or those that he claims are disloyal to him.  Not to the Constitution, to him.  Personally.

That’s some scary stuff.

In case you don’t quite get it, note that Mr. Trump is pushing the Department of Defense to have the Army take disciplinary action against Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman for his reporting, through the chain of command, his uneasiness with Mr. Trump’s now infamous call with the Ukrainian president.  He testified to Congress under a subpoena — following orders and his oath to the Constitution.  Said Mr. Trump of Colonel Vindman, “He is over with the military.”  This from a man that pardoned three military war criminals.

The bottom line is this.  The President of the United States clearly thinks that he is squarely in charge of the country.  Not as a leader, but as an autocrat.  Whatever he wants, he gets.  Whatever he tells people to do, they must do it or be subject to retribution or worse, criminal prosecution.  Not legal orders, mind you.  Rather, anything he wants, regardless of legality or morality.

Sadly, though profoundly disturbed, I am not shocked by Mr. Trump’s behavior.  I am, however, dumbfounded that with only one exception, the former Republicans in Congress have formed a cabal that has gone over lock, stock and barrel to aiding and abetting his outrageous behavior.  Indeed, they cheer and applaud his every inane and threatening statement.  Literally.  Take a look at video of his public appearances the day after the Impeachment Trial.  You know, the “trial” where the Trumpists refused to allow any evidence or testimony.

Mr. Trump during his campaign famously said that he could shoot someone in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue in New York City and get away with it.  Sadly, that may have been a prophecy rather than an apocryphal statement.  Clearly he has come to believe that not only can he get away with that, but apparently he now believes that he has the right to do that if it is in the “national interest” — meaning in his interest.

Can you imagine what will happen if he wins a second term?

 


All Hail The King!

The Impeachment Trial of Donald John Trump continues today.  It is impossible to know exactly what will occur over the next 30 hours or so, but a betting person would place money on the increasing likelihood that the Senate will vote “no” on calling witnesses or documents during the trial and then proceed to acquit Mr. Trump of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

And we will be the worse for it.

Politics aside, meaning whether or not you felt that Mr. Trump should be removed from office, all of us should be appalled that the Senate will conclude the trial without actually holding a trial as we all know it should be conducted.  Indeed, in the latest Quinnipiac Poll — a source respected by all mainstream politicians — 75% of respondents stated that there should be witnesses questioned and documents reviewed during the Impeachment Trial.  Only 20% said that they were not necessary.  Those in favor included a majority of Republicans as well as overwhelming numbers of Democrats and Independents.  The reasons for wanting them may vary — for proving either an acquittal or a conviction — but the fact remains that they are wanted.  So much for elected officials listening to their constituents.

More shocking, more incredible, more dangerous than all of the preposterous arguments being put forward by the Trump cultists, is the one proffered by Professor Alan Dershowitz, one of the president’s defense lawyers.  His twisted logic essentially says that a president can do anything that he wants.  Period.  He is totally in line with Mr. Trump’s declaration, “Then, I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.”

Specifically, Professor Dershowitz argued that if a president is running for re-election and believes that being re-elected is in the public interest, then that person can do whatever is necessary to get re-elected.  After a long explanation, he summarized by saying, “If a president does something he believes will help him get elected is in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”

Think about the ramifications of saying that a president can do anything to get elected and the Congress can do nothing about it.  The imagination runs wild.

So for those keeping score at home, here is where we are:

  • The president believes that he does not have to submit to oversight from the Congress and therefore refuses to turn over any documents or witnesses to help Congress do its Constitutionally mandated job.
  • The entire membership of one political party in Congress supports that assertion and actively works to keep witnesses and documents from their oversight.
  • The defense team of the president confirms that the president does not have to submit to Congressional oversight.
  • The defense team then goes one step further by saying that if a president believes that his actions are in the “national interest” then he can do anything that he wants to do.
  • The president believes, and now has had it affirmed, that he is the state.  Whatever is good for him is good for the country.
  • The Senate votes to affirm all of the above.

Put all the pieces together and we no longer have an accountable president.  We have the equivalent of a divine king.  (There are many evangelicals that believe that it is God’s will that Mr. Trump was elected.)  Our very own Louis XIV!  (Famous quote one:  “It is legal because I wish it.”  Famous quote two:  “Has God forgotten all I have done for Him?”)  I am not hyperventilating, or over-stating the case when I use that phrase because the arguments are in the same vein as those used for the divine right of kings.  To continue in this direction puts the great American experiment on life support.

Rather than “king” maybe we should worry that we will soon have an “emperor.”  Perhaps the best historical analogy is the end of the Roman Republic.  After long and bitter political infighting, the Senate abdicated its responsibilities to an Emperor.

Is there any doubt that Mr. Trump, given his track record to date and proven propensity to do only what he thinks personally benefits him, will stop at nothing to win the next election?  Then what?

The possible consequences are limited only by one’s own imagination.  Consider this scenario as an example.  Mr. Trump already believes that he lost the 2016 popular vote because three million people voted illegally.  He formed a commission to “prove” it.  (The commission disbanded without finding any evidence of such a thing.)  Suppose the polls show that he will lose again in 2020 and decides that all of those illegal voters were in California and that they were all illegal immigrants (another theory he has espoused with no proof what-so-ever)?  Suppose he then declares that it is in the national interest to prevent that from happening and shuts down polling places in California or, after the results are in, declares that it is in the national interest to nullify all votes in California?  What mechanism exists to prevent that?  Public outrage?  A dysfunctional Congress?  The press?

It is increasingly clear that our Founding Fathers assumed that at least a modicum of decency and fair play would exist in either the presidency or in the Congress in order to make the checks and balances actually work.  We now clearly can see that an individual who knows no boundaries and bursts through any guardrails that may have existed, coupled to the lack of any will to stop him, means that anything goes.

Here’s the thing to remember.  Whatever shenanigans happen in the next few days, whoever argues that the Trump cultists are on the wrong side of history, or that they are setting a terrible precedent for future presidents or even that our democracy may be in jeopardy, there is only one answer.

Repeat after me.

THEY. DON’T. CARE.

All that matters now is protecting Mr. Trump who in turn promises to protect them (Ha!) which allows them to retain power.

NOTHING. ELSE. MATTERS.

Is it too much to say that we now have a king rather than a president?  Perhaps.  Only the events over the next few months will let us know for sure.  I for one am extremely nervous about what Mr. Trump thinks he can do now that he feels no consequences for his election dallying with Russia and his extortion attempts on Ukraine.

Everything seems to be fair game to him and he sees no problem with his immoral behavior.  Our only recourse is to be vigilant, continue to cry “foul” while holding our Senators and Representatives accountable and turning out in record numbers in November to vote these people into obscurity.

 


Through The Looking Glass

“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

—- Alice in Alice in Wonderland

To believe the ongoing defense arguments in the Impeachment Trial of Donald John Trump, it would help to be in Alice’s shoes.  Although, with the information coming out over the weekend, I’m not sure that even that would help.

Two revelations in particular make the president’s defense increasingly difficult to believe.  One is the roughly 80 minute long video and audio tape released by Mr. Lev Parnas — the “associate” of Mr. Rudy Giuliani in the Ukrainian shakedown scheme — where he discusses the firing of the then U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.  The second, and most important, is the report detailing the interactions between the president and his National Security Adviser John Bolton concerning the shakedown of Ukraine.

In the audio tape, Mr. Parnas and Mr. Trump discuss Ambassador Yovanovitch and the president is told that she is “bad-mouthing” him.  The response?

“Get rid of her!  Get her out tomorrow.  I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow.  Take her out.  Okay?  Do it!”

In addition to sounding like a bad mob movie, this is troubling in at least two ways.  While the president’s defense is true, that he can hire and fire whomever he wants as an Ambassador, it wasn’t what happened as much as how it happened.

Mr. Trump claims he doesn’t know Mr. Parnas.  This is just another one of his over 16,200 documented lies to date in office.  Listening to the tape, he clearly does know him.  The context is a general discussion about Ukraine and U.S. support to that fledgling democracy locked in a hot war with Russia.  Note that he doesn’t say “we need to look into that,” or tell an aide that he needs more information or talk to Secretary of State Pompeo about what to do.  Instead, on the spot, he commands her immediate removal.

This happens for one of two reasons.  It could be that there already had been long discussions about how the Ambassador refused to “play ball” in the scheme and in fact was acting to end corruption — by opposing the actions of Giuliani and Associates.

The other reflects the president’s decision making style.  Assume he really did not know Mr. Parnas.  Then that means anyone could walk into the president’s inner circle (the recording was made during an intimate sit down dinner of about ten people), say any old outrageous thing and the president would bring the most powerful office in the land to bear on the spur of the moment and act on it without study, knowledge, strategy or process.  That may be the scarier of the two prospects.

But now, as Alice would say, the situation is getting “curiouser and curousier.”

Mr. Bolton apparently is ready and willing to testify to what is in the manuscript of his upcoming book.  Specifically, that in mid-August, as all government agencies were pushing for the release of about $400 million in desperately needed assistance to Ukraine, the president told him that he would not do so until the Ukrainians provided information on the Bidens and on Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.  These two conspiracy theories have been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked by his own administration’s officials.

The manuscript puts the lie to everything that the president, his lawyers and his cult followers in Congress have claimed since the whole mess became public.

The manuscript also reportedly shows the full depth and breadth of the conspiracy to extort Ukraine by illuminating the involvement of the Secretary of State, Attorney General and the Acting Chief of Staff.  The whole place seems to be rotting from within.

Here is the kicker.  The draft book was given to the White House staff on 30 December 2019.  That means that the president, his defense attorneys and others in the administration knew about the testimony Mr. Bolton was ready to give and therefore, not only did they continue to knowingly lie when they said no one could testify to the president’s direct involvement, they knew it when the Senate voted not to have any witnesses or documents produced at the trial.

Let that sink in.

I would postulate that as a minimum, Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (TR-Ky) knew it too when he set the rules for the trial.  Clearly, they were ready to jam through a vote to preclude witnesses knowing that there was at least one person that could provide exceedingly damaging testimony about the president’s real intentions.

A total sham and whitewash of a trial executed with malice of forethought.

My theory is that they knew the facts would come out eventually, but they did not care.  The argument would be that the president was already acquitted and so, while “troubling”, too bad, so sad, we can’t do anything about it now.  The House should have done their job (another canard among many), but they didn’t and so now we just have to live with it.  Oh well. On to the election!

Only they got caught.

On Saturday I was convinced that the trial would end without any additional evidence or witnesses.  They almost got away with it, but now I think that as many as eight or nine Republican Senators will vote for witnesses.  What form that takes, and how many witnesses get called, I have no idea, but I would speculate that it is about a 60-40 chance that at least Mr. Bolton testifies.  It is also possible, of course, that Mr. McConnell (aka Midnight Mitch, aka Moscow Mitch) might pull a legislative rabbit out of his hat to protect Mr. Trump, but there also may be enough pressure from his own caucus that he relents.

Much attention focused on four Republican Senators and how they might vote.  In my view, and the view of several political analysts, there were never going to be four Senators joining the Democrats to vote for witnesses.  There needed to be safety in numbers of at least six or seven in order that no one of them is accused of having “caved” to the Democrats and been the deciding vote.  Otherwise, the Red Queen would have tweeted “Off with their heads!”

It is early in the proceedings, even if Mr. Trump and his accomplice in the Senate Mr. McConnell hoped to have it wrapped up by the end of this week.  But as we have seen so often in these proceedings, even twenty-four hours is an eternity in the current political environment.  Who knows what will happen?

I turn to Alice for one more parting piece of advice to the public and to those in Congress that may still care about holding this administration accountable.

“It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.  If you want to go someplace else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!”

 


Whitewash!

The proceedings in the Senate concerning the Impeachment of Donald John Trump got underway this afternoon.  Right from the start the fix is in.  We can no longer call it a trial.  I don’t know what else to call it other than a whitewash.

Moments ago the Republicans voted unanimously not to have any witnesses or documents produced as evidence.  How one could call this a trial, when they refuse to look at any evidence or listen to any witnesses, is beyond me.

Technically, they voted to table a motion to an amendment to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (TR-Ky) (aka “midnight Mitch”) rules for this hearing.  In theory, they could call for evidence, — get this — at the end of the whatever we call this.  The ramifications are many, including solidifying Mr. Trump’s claims that he can do anything he wants under Article II of the Constitution.  Oversight is DOA.

I am dumbfounded that a trial can proceed without any evidence or witnesses.

Recent polls show that 71% of Americans think that witnesses and evidence should be presented at this Impeachment Trial.  But now we aren’t going to have a trial.  We are going to have a whitewash of the president’s actions.

It seems that if the Republicans really wanted to exonerate the president, they would want to produce witnesses and evidence that exonerates him.  Without any evidence what-so-ever no one should claim that he was exonerated.  Having listened to all of the evidence, they may have decided to acquit him, but at least all the information would be out there.

Many pundits, historians and former politicians have often said that the Republicans in Congress are “on the wrong side of history” or “will have to look themselves in the mirror” and that they have lost all integrity.  Clearly, they do not care.  All that matters now, is that they retain power at all costs.  All costs.  All Republicans in Congress are all in on Trump.  They own everything that happens and all of his actions from here on in.

One can only conclude that the Republicans know in their hearts that the charges are true and that the president did all that he is accused of doing, but that keeping power is more important so the facts must not come out.  They are clearly afraid that if all of the evidence came out, they would be in political hot water if they acquitted him anyway.

Our democracy is becoming a sham.

God Bless America!

 


Too Big To Fail

It occurred to me as I watched the Impeachment Trial of Donald John Trump officially begin last Thursday, that like several banks and corporations during the Great Recession of the 2000’s, the amount of lying, conniving, lawbreaking, personal greed and damage to the dignity of the Office of the President of the United States is so much, that it becomes too big for him to fail.  Or in this case, to be convicted.  Republicans in the House and Senate, along with key Cabinet positions in his Administration, have bought into the Trump Cult to such a degree that they cannot afford for him to fail lest they expose their own weaknesses, misconduct, phoniness, fraudulent actions and other misdeeds.

As things now stand, the trial that begins in earnest next Tuesday will be a sham.  The new developments coming out almost daily continue to show the depth and breadth of Mr. Trump’s efforts to rig the 2020 election.  Those efforts are matched by the depth and breadth of involvement by members of his Administration and his supporters in Congress.

You want a good example?  How about the fact the we are learning from written documents, including phone calls and text messages, that Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) and his chief aide, Mr. Derek Harvey were in close contact with Mr. Lev Parnas, the chief “associate” (read thug) working with Mr. Rudy Giuliani.  These are the guys on the ground involved in the Ukraine caper trying to find manufactured dirt on Mr. Trump’s probable election opponent Mr. Joe Biden.  Mr. Nunes and Mr. Harvey were aiding and abetting the operation.  This is the same Devin Nunes that is the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee that investigated Mr. Trump’s activities.  He is one of those guys who shouted (literally) throughout the hearings that it was all made up, a hoax and a sham.  Even as he was in on it.  And even as he was supposed to help supervise the proceedings.

It is sometimes difficult to keep track of all the names and institutions that are normally outside the course of daily events.  Sometimes I think that, like at the ball park, “you can’t tell the players without a score card!”  But it is important to see what is going on in plain sight as well as behind closed doors.

One of those institutions is the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) (although Mr. Trump tweets it as GOA).  This is the non-partisan group tasked by law to monitor government activities and to report its findings to Congress. The GAO determined last week that the president’s withholding of appropriated funds for Ukraine broke the law.  Specifically, it broke the 1974 Impoundment Control Act (ICA) which was enacted in response to President Richard Nixon’s efforts to withhold appropriated funds to distract from his own Impeachment proceedings.  Several emails among government officials had already surfaced that in the months that the funds were withheld, conscientious government officials cited the law as they sought to determine why the funds were not sent.  It is not an obscure or non-relevant provision as some in the administration would like you to believe.

In the past week, Mr. Lev Parnas has been dropping some real bomb shells. While his testimony should not be taken as the absolute truth on its own merits, it does provide insight into the thinking going on and provides a road map for further investigation.  While many impugn his character, keep in mind that criminals commit crimes and they often turn on their fellow criminals for purposes of their own.  It does not mean that they aren’t factual.  But don’t take him at his word.  Look at the documents that he and his lawyers continue to turn over to Congress.  People lie.  Documents tend to lead to the truth.

In this busy week, revelations surfaced that the former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch (the ambassador Mr. Giuliani wanted fired for interfering with his extortion scheme) may have been under physical surveillance by Americans and in danger from Americans.  Not a peep from the Secretary of State defending his career Foreign Service Officers until cornered at a press conference yesterday.  He announced no action to conduct an investigation.  Days earlier, Ukraine began an investigation.  On their own.  As of today, Ukrainian officials asked the U.S. FBI to help them, but still no investigation initiated by any U.S. agency to protect our diplomats.  Is it because this administration does not care about U.S. citizens and diplomats overseas or is it because they do not want to know the answer?

More news this week as Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Parnas and the third thug in the ring, Mr. Igor Furman were reportedly being paid by a Russian oligarch (under indictment in the US) with close ties to Vladimir Putin.  (Why is it that all of Mr. Trump’s roads lead to Putin?)

As the evidence mounts, it is clear that this extortion scheme went far deeper than “just” a phone call between two presidents.  To date, no Republican has seriously contested any of the evidence produced around the Impeachment.  They have attacked witnesses, sources of information, process and other things that have nothing to do with the facts.  The facts are not in dispute.  For that matter, Mr. Trump himself admits to them.

As part of their scheme to white wash the Impeachment Trial, the Senate Republicans are setting up false equivalencies.  This is especially true with respect to witnesses and additional  evidence not available when the House did its investigation.  The president continues to block key information and to prevent witnesses from testifying (in my view this just reinforces that they have no exculpatory evidence).  The Republicans will claim that since they did not get, say, Mr. Hunter Biden to testify, then not having Mr. John Bolton testify means that it is “even” — no one got what they wanted, and thus that it is fair.  Baloney.  Hunter Biden has no material testimony as to what Mr. Trump did.  Mr. Bolton has significant first hand knowledge.  There are a multitude of similar arguments being put forward to prevent the truth from coming out.  This sets up their ultimate defense.

The Republican defense argument is likely to be “so what?”  “Yes, he did it.  What’s it to ya?”  Reasonable people may dispute whether the punishment, removal from office, fits the crime, extorting a foreign power to get them to interfere in a US election, but the facts remain.  Indeed, the vast scope of the whole scheme is becoming clearer and clearer.  It was a classic mob action.  It also indicates a pattern of behavior by the president.  It is clear that he will continue to act this way.  It is his nature and, we now know, the way he operates in every aspect of his life, past and present.  It is time to hold him accountable.  His behavior is not going to get better, and without accountability it can get a lot worse.

It seems to me that Mr. Trump now has sufficient accomplices in his administration, and in the Congress, that he feels he can get away with anything.  They do not think that anything is off limits to them in the pursuit of their self-interests and their own power, including criminal activity.  Nothing.  And that is not hyperbole as we continue to see for ourselves.

I have also come to understand that we will never know the real truth behind, or the extent of the corruption.  The system is not geared for fraud and criminal activity on such a scale, especially when it is coordinated by the President of the United States.  And most especially when the Attorney General of the United States does everything in or out of his power to protect the actions of the president. It’s just “too big.” Sadly, this includes whatever it is Vladimir Putin has on him.  (My view is that has to do with money laundering and other illegal financial ties.)

As Timothy Egan put it more eloquently than I in a New York Times essay, evil attracts evil.  In the absence of good people acting, evil triumphs.  There is evil in the White House and it is spreading throughout our government.


Where Does It End?

The last few weeks produced a year’s worth of newsworthy events.  Among other things was the Commander-in-Chief interfering with the effective application of good order and discipline in the military under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  The president pardoned three men convicted or accused (and awaiting trial) for war crimes — two Army officers and one Navy Chief Petty Officer.  In doing so he further demonstrated a total lack of understanding of the military by tweeting (of course) that he did so because “we train our boys to be killing machines and then prosecute them when they kill!”  Such statements totally ignore the fact that what separates our military from most others is that in training to fight for our country, our military also learns to do so with discipline, under a code of conduct that prohibits indiscriminate killing, especially of civilians and works to protect the honor and dignity of our nation’s morals, espoused in a speech by General Douglas MacArthur, as “duty, honor, country.”  Note that all three men were brought up on charges of crimes under the UCMJ by their own soldiers and Sailors, not by higher ranking officers trying to make some politically correct example of them, as the president implies.

Hanging over everything of course, is the impending impeachment of the President of the United States.  In the course of events, three particularly troubling things are happening that in my opinion fundamentally threaten the nature of our democracy.

Very troubling is the conscious use of Russian propaganda on the part of Republican U.S. Senators to try and defend the president’s shakedown scheme against Ukraine to help his own reelection in 2020 using taxpayer money.  Otherwise knowledgeable and intelligent Republican Senators such as John Neely Kennedy (LA) and Ted Cruz (TX) and others publicly say that we do not know whether the Russians meddled in the 2016 election, rather it was the Ukrainians.  Such garbage could have been written by the former KGB officer Vladimir Putin himself.  A unanimous intelligence community agrees it was the Russians. Period.  They agree it was not Ukraine, a fact FBI Director Christopher Wray reiterated just last week.  The alleged Ukrainian “meddling” is most often a reference to a single op-ed piece written by the Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States criticizing then candidate Trump for saying that Crimea (stolen from Ukraine by force by Russia) “belongs” to Russia.  Since Ukraine and Russia continue in a hot war, it might not be too far of a stretch to say that there were some hard feelings towards Mr. Trump saying, essentially, that Ukraine should be a part of Russia again.  Another statement straight out of Putin’s talking points.

It is shameful that Republican Representatives and Senators perpetuate such lies on the citizens of the greatest nation on Earth.

But it get worse.

The long anticipated Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) report on the origins of the investigation into meddling in the 2016 election came out.  This report, according to Mr. Trump and his supporters, would unmask the “deep state” and clearly show that the FBI and DOJ were out to keep Mr. Trump from becoming president through a vast “liberal” conspiracy.  It did none of those things.  None.  On the contrary, while the IG’s report found some troubling procedural problems that need to be corrected or changed, it explicitly says that the basis of the investigation was solid, within DOJ guidelines, had no bias behind any of the decisions made and was fully appropriate.

The president’s reaction?  He lashed out as usual.  Among other things he referred to the people in the FBI as “scum.”  Perhaps we as a country have come to expect that from a President of the United States, but I have not. But, I am no longer surprised.  What deeply troubles me is that Attorney General William Barr, the DOJ and FBI boss, echoed the president’s remarks.  Instead of supporting the FBI or the work of the independent IG, in an interview with NBC News he said about the report and investigation:

“I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press.  I think there were gross abuses and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI.”

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal he said of the investigation “It was a travesty, and there were many abuses.”  So much for the credibility of an independent IG and so much for the Attorney General working for the people of the United States rather than being the president’s personal shill, I mean attorney.

Deeply troubling.  But it gets worse yet.

The president is about to be impeached (appropriately in my opinion, but that’s a post for another day).  The Senate will then conduct a trial on the two Articles of Impeachment to either remove Mr. Trump from office, or acquit him.

All 100 of the sitting Senators act as jurors and take an oath.  It is not the oath of office, but an oath as a juror.  According to Rule XXV of the Senate Rules On Impeachment Trials the oath is:

“I solemnly swear (or affirm) that in all things appertaining to the trial of ___, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help me God.”

And yet.

The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) went on TV and declared that he is “in total coordination with the White House counsel” on the rules and parameters of the trial — such as calling witnesses or not —  and opined that the president would be acquitted and that all Republicans would so vote.  Senator McConnell gets to set the rules of this trial and is also a juror.  Fair and impartial?  It is like the jury foreman in a case getting together with the defense attorney before the trial to determine how they will acquit the defendant.

Other Republican Senators have expressed similar opinions, most notably Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC).  On Sunday’s Face the Nation he said that he was going to vote to acquit the president and that “I don’t need any witnesses.  I am ready to vote on the underlying articles.”  Earlier last week he said that he did not even intend to review any of the facts raised before the House of Representatives during the investigation leading to the Articles of Impeachment.  So much for following one’s oath.

Impeachment is a serious and sobering step.  The Senate deserves to treat it as such.  Instead we continue to hear Republicans moan and groan about “hoaxes” “witch hunts” “undermining the 2016 election” and other whiny defenses of the president.  Please note that not one of them disputes the facts as presented in the House.

Our democracy is in trouble as the president continues to argue that he is above the law.  He claims that he cannot be investigated by law enforcement or by the Congress.  Nobody or no entity or no organization can do so.  His lawyers have even argued in court that if the president actually did shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in New York (as he famously said during his campaign) that he could not be prosecuted.

In recent days, Mr. Trump’s “personal lawyer” Rudy Guiliani, just back from a “fact finding” trip to Ukraine, is bragging to anyone that will listen that he “forced out” U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanavitch because she was getting in the way of his schemes.

The president is being impeached for Obstruction of Congress and Abuse of Power.  It is clear that he did not just abuse power, rather that he continues abusing power today.  Events are unfolding that impact our elections.  Not the one in 2016, but the upcoming 2020 elections.  We already know that Mr. Trump thinks his position is so weak that he must cheat to win.  He took advantage of Russian meddling and he has often publicly stated that he will take help again from other nations if it will help him win.

The past is past.  We need to protect our future.


How Low Will They Go?

As more and more information becomes available through the release of sworn testimony concerning the shakedown of Ukraine perpetrated by the President of the United States and his minions, the Republicans in Congress have become increasingly desperate in their defense of his actions.

They have used arguments ranging from the ridiculous to the downright dishonest.  Recently, three Senators that I thought were relatively straight shooters, even if I didn’t usually agree with their ideas, grovelled in front of Mr. Trump in public.  At campaign rallies, Rand Paul (KY) and John Kennedy (LA) made speeches demeaning others in terms that would get any fourth grader in trouble as Mr. Trump stood behind them grinning his “look what I’ve made them do” grin.  Lindsey Graham (S.C.) increasingly is getting desperate in his attempts to be Mr. Trump’s bestie.  When asked about the most recent incriminating testimony from witnesses in the House of Representatives, he stated that he refused to read the transcripts.  In other words, a future juror in the president’s trial (should he be impeached which I think he deserves to be) refuses to even look at the evidence, much less give it due consideration.  Appalling.

Next week the public hearings in the impeachment inquiry begin.  After weeks of complaining that it was a secret “Soviet style” proceeding, the president and his underlings now claim that the hearings should not be public.  Because they know that unequivocal evidence exists that an orchestrated shakedown occurred?  Perhaps they fear that the public will continue the trend towards supporting impeachment if they hear the truth?

According to several reports, House Republicans are now contemplating claiming that the president did not know what his flunkeys, specifically Mr. Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Mick Mulvaney, and Ambassador Gordon Sondland, were doing.  They went “rogue.”  Nice try.  Mr. Trump himself released a Memorandum for the Record (MFR) that captures in his own words the  shakedown of the President of Ukraine.  Numerous individuals with direct knowledge, including listening to the phone call, have testified that there was a months long effort to make it clear to the Ukrainian government that to get what they so desperately needed to fend off Russian aggression was a public statement by the Ukrainian president.  According to the sworn testimony of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent that statement must include three words.  “Investigation.” “Biden.” “Clinton.”  No statement, no reward.  A shakedown at the direction of Mr. Trump.  Also known in legal circles as extortion.

In the Senate, it appears that their defense of Mr. Trump will boil down to a three pronged response. “He did it.”  “So what?”  “Get over it.”

Nice.

The evidence will continue to show that the president abused the power of his office.  He probably is used to doing business this way in all of his endeavors.  Additionally, there was a concerted effort, as outlined in sworn testimony, to cover it up.  We all know enough about Mr. Trump that if he gets away with this abrogation of the public trust he will do it again.

The story is not very complicated.  In the coming weeks we will hear it for ourselves.  All Americans believe that no one is above the law.  That is now being put to the test.  Impeachment and removal from office is a sobering responsibility given to the Congress through the Constitution.  It should be approached with the utmost care and with a full understanding of the consequences of such an action.  Trivializing the process with playground epithets and unserious rationalizations should not be a part of the process.  One would expect both Democrats and Republicans to understand the stakes and to live up to their oaths of office.  Undertake due diligence.  Review the evidence.  Treat career diplomats and military officers testifying under oath with respect.  And yes, search their souls for the strength to do what they think is in keeping with our national values and laws.  We should expect nothing less from our elected officials.  Unfortunately, one party is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Trump, Inc.

He did it so get over it is not a defense.  It is a desperate short-term effort to retain power that is unworthy of American values and our faith in the rule of law.  Politicians should rise to the occasion and reflect our better selves.  Unfortunately, I expect that the road ahead will only get lower and muddier.

 


A Sad Day For America

Yesterday the House of Representatives voted to authorize the rules to continue an impeachment inquiry into the actions of the President of the United States with respect to Ukraine.  It is a sober moment for our nation and it should be a reason for each of us to pause and to think about the ramifications of this action.

Contrary to what some have publicly stated, this was not a vote to impeach.  The vote pertained to the conduct of the public fact gathering portion of the proceeding.  Should the House decide that the president did in fact conduct himself in a manner contrary to the Constitution, they will draft Articles of Impeachment.  The entire House then votes to approve or disapprove each of the Articles.  Should one or more Article pass, the Senate then holds a trial, presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and votes to convict or acquit the president on each Article.

So far, the majority of Republicans in the House have made a mockery of the proceedings.  At the direction of the president, they are spreading lies and misinformation about the investigation.  This included storming a classified conference room to “expose” the “secret” proceedings.  Not mentioned is that over 40 Republican Congressmen already had access to those proceedings and indeed participated in them to the fullest extent.  Yesterday, they went to the House floor to decry the inquiry as akin to secret trials held in the Soviet Union.  It is shameful and dishonest behavior on their part.

Now reports indicate that Mr. Trump will monetarily support the election campaigns of Senators that promise to vote against any Articles of Impeachment.  He will withhold supporting funds from those that do not.  We used to call this bribery.

The Impeachment Inquiry rules incorporate everything that the Republicans asked for with public hearings.  Everything.  And the rules approved yesterday afford the president more leeway and ability to participate than either set of hearings involving President Nixon or President Clinton.

The process should be fair and open.  But here’s the deal.  We all already know the basics of what happened.  The president, his Acting Chief of Staff, and his personal attorney have all been on television telling us exactly what happened.  A long parade of career diplomats and military officers followed with contextual information that indicates just how wide-spread and long-planned the effort to extort the Ukrainian government actually was.  It was an old-fashioned shake down.  The president wanted “dirt” on his main political rival and to have the Ukrainian government fuel a conspiracy theory that the Russians did not really interfere in the 2016 election.  Rather, it was a set up by the Democrats to undermine Mr. Trump’s campaign run from, wait for it, Ukraine.  Both conspiracy theories have been long ago debunked by our entire intelligence service and by several of Mr. Trump’s own political appointees.

In exchange for made-up information fabricated by Mr. Trump and his henchmen, the president would release nearly $400 million in aid that Ukraine needed to fight off Russian backed separatists.  While Mr. Trump ran his crazy mob scam, Ukrainians were dying on the battlefield.  Mr. Trump undermined Ukrainian security and our own national security for his personal domestic political goals.  He used taxpayer money to extort another country to interfere in our domestic elections for his benefit.  This was not a government effort to eliminate corruption generally.  There is no such effort or policy in this administration unless the only country in the world that is corrupt is Ukraine and the only people in Ukraine that were corrupt was the Bidens.

It was not just one “perfect” phone call either.  The parade of witnesses deposed by the House committees (there were three committees involved) described a long-term, many pronged, concerted effort to run the scam.  The phone call was the result of months of heavy pressure outside of normal diplomatic channels to get Ukraine to fabricate lies to help the political fortunes of Mr. Trump.

There is also the little matter of the president standing on the White House lawn and encouraging China to interfere in the 2020 election, just as he publicly asked Russia to interfere in the 2016 election.

We already know all this.  (Although, I suspect that it is only the tip of the ice berg.)

The House of Representatives is focused only on his egregious behavior regarding Ukraine.  They are not considering impeachment based on his status as an unindicted co-conspirator for money laundering and campaign violations regarding payments to a porn star and a Playboy model.  They are not trying to impeach him for the 110 known contacts between his campaign and Russians during the 2016 election.  They are not drawing up Articles for the 10 clear cut unlawful efforts to obstruct justice during the Mueller Investigation.  They are not contemplating impeaching him for the over 13,500 documented lies to the American people.

Equally important, we all know that a president cannot be impeached because we disagree with his policies.  We cannot impeach a president because of an obnoxious personality.  We can impeach a president when our national security is put at risk through an abuse of power.

In my opinion the facts surrounding the Ukraine shakedown are not in dispute.  Please note that the Republicans are not defending Mr. Trump by disputing the facts or by providing an explanation of his actions.  They are only attacking the process, and now that process is of their own design.  If they had a factual basis to defend the president, they would use it.  They have no facts on their side.

If the facts are not in dispute then the only remaining question is whether they meet the standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”  I think that they do, in the context of presidential abuse of power — the major concern of the Founding Fathers — and obstruction of justice by refusing to turn over documents and witnesses lawfully subpoenaed by Congress.

Some argue that with elections about a year away the president should not be impeached but rather the people should decide Mr. Trump’s fate through the ballot box.  I think that argument is illogical.  Mr. Trump was trying to interfere with the 2020 election after we already know that there was interference in the 2016 election.  He knows better.  More to the point, how can we be sure that the 2020 election is legitimate if we already know that Mr. Trump is trying to stack the deck in his own favor?  He is already trying to steal the 2020 election.  We know this.  Why allow it to happen?

Likewise those that argue that this is just the Democrats trying to undo the 2016 election should take another look.  The inquiry is not about the 2016 election.  It is about what is happening now to influence the 2020 election.  It is not about the past, it’s about the future.

For those that argue that Mr. Trump was out of line to extort the Ukrainians, but that his actions did not rise to the level of an impeachable offense I merely ask, where is that line?  How much can a president put national security at risk before we say that it is too much?  How far can a president abuse the power of the office before we say that it was abused too much?  Whether or not the Senate convicts Mr. Trump on any charges — and I believe that inevitably there will be Articles of Impeachment approved in the House — it is important to put a Constitutional marker down that such behavior is not acceptable and that there are consequences to ignoring the law.

It is a sober day when an impeachment proceeding is necessary.  No one should take joy in the process.  It is also a sad day when an entire political party turns into a cult of personality and publicly attacks a Constitutional process while many of those same politicians privately agree that the leader of the cult abused his power.

There is no telling how events will unfold between now and the end of the year.  I only know that it will be a tough time for our country.


A Sober Assessment

With Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) decision to open an impeachment inquiry into the actions of the president, a new chapter of American history is about to be written.  This is serious business and it should be approached soberly by all of us.

Recognizing that I have used this space before to call for an impeachment inquiry into Mr. Trump’s activities, I still caution everyone, Democrat, Republican, Independent or Undecided to pay attention to events as they unfold and not to jump to any conclusions until all of the facts are known and fully understood.  Such an inquiry should not be taken lightly and the full consequences for our democracy should be fully understood and everyone must conduct themselves appropriately.

Please keep in mind, as well, that the inquiry is only the first step of many as the Congress moves forward.  An inquiry determines if the House of Representatives considers there to be sufficient evidence to formulate Articles of Impeachment.  If they so decide that the evidence exists, then through the Judiciary Committee they formulate the Articles and the entire House votes on each Article as to whether it should be referred to the Senate.  The vote is on a simple majority.  Should Articles be approved, the matter is referred to the Senate for a trial.  It takes a two-thirds majority in the Senate to convict on any particular Article.  Think of the House as a grand jury.  They investigate and if they find sufficient evidence they refer it to trial in the Senate.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides at the trial, although the Majority Leader of the Senate can formulate the process by which the trial proceeds.

In my view, the inquiry is fully appropriate.  Forget for the moment (if such is possible) the results of the Mueller Report, the misappropriation of funds, the declarations of National Emergencies where none exist, the violation of campaign laws and the rest of it.  The information that became available in the course of last week concerning Mr. Trump’s interactions with the president of Ukraine is sufficient, in and of itself, to warrant investigation.

If you remember nothing else, note that the Russian interference involved the 2016 election.  Mr. Trump was working to solicit interference in the 2020 election.  After all we learned about the past, Mr. Trump intended to move ahead with a bigger and better plan to throw the next election.  Note that his now famous phone call took place the day after Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller testified before Congress.  In the phone call Mr. Trump is quoted as saying, “As you saw yesterday, that whole performance ended with a poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine.”  In Mr. Trump’s mind there was no consequence to his actions in 2016 so he decided to do it again.

The information in the public domain was released by the Trump Administration itself.  The memorandum for the record of the 25 July conversation (read it here) and the unclassified version of the whistle-blower’s complaint (read it here) were not “leaked” or otherwise released by nefarious means.  Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Trump have themselves validated that the events occurred as depicted in those documents.  And more.

It is the “and more” that adds context to the matter and illustrates the depth of the alleged abuse of office.  The problem is way more concerning than one phone call, although in itself it is quite serious.

Without going into every twist and turn, the big picture indicates that Mr. Giuliani began working with the Ukrainian government to dig up dirt on former Vice President Biden and his son Hunter in late 2018, as soon as it became apparent the Mr. Biden would run for president and be a serious threat to Mr. Trump’s re-election.  He worked with discredited and then current Ukrainian prosecutors of the government of President Poroshenko.  In January, February, and March of this year he continued to pressure them to investigate the Bidens and to promote disproved conspiracy theories concerning the Democratic National Committee emails and servers and the then Ambassador from the U.S. to Ukraine, claiming that they worked to interfere in the 2016 election (not the Russians).

All was going well from Mr. Giuliani’s stand point until on 21 April Volodymyr Zelensky beat all predictions by defeating Mr. Poroshenko in the presidential election.  Mr. Zelensky ran on a platform of eliminating corruption in the Ukrainian government and nearly all new prosecutors were appointed.  Much of Mr. Giuliani’s work went to waste and they needed to start over in trying to co-opt the Ukrainians.  That process began with a congratulatory phone call to the winner.

In May the president permanently recalled U.S. Ambassador Masha Yovanonitch, a career State Department employee, because she was trying to counter Mr. Giuliani’s attempts at co-opting the new government.  She was, in essence, fired for working to protect the national security interests of the United States.

Later in May, Mr. Trump cancelled Vice President Mike Pence’s trip to the Ukrainian president’s inauguration, an embarrassing blow to the new president.  In the whistle-blower’s complaint the reason was to withhold favors for Mr. Zelensky until they could determine if he would “play ball” with Mr. Trump through Mr. Giuliani — presumably meaning that they would work to discredit the Bidens and to support conspiracy theories about former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s emails.

In July of this year, the Office of Management and Budget, on the direction of the president himself, according to the whistle-blower, withheld much needed military and other aid for Ukraine.  When State Department and Pentagon officials tried to find out the reason, they were stonewalled. On 25 July the president made his phone call and on the 26th, envoys of the U.S. met with President Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials to help them “navigate the demands the president had made” the previous day.

Other outrageous details of improper behavior can be found in the complaint that the Intelligence Community (IC) Inspector General (IG) and the Acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) both testified was “credible.”  Both individuals were appointed by Mr. Trump.

It might also be noted quickly that Ukraine is in a fighting war with Russia.  13,000 Ukrainians have died in the fight and the Russians helped to shoot down Malaysian Air Flight 17 with the loss of all 298 people onboard.  Any delay or cancellation of arms to Ukraine helps Russia in its efforts.

In the grand tradition of Washington DC, a cover-up occurred.  As a minimum, the details of the phone call and other activities were over-classified and stored on a computer designed to be used for only the highest classified compartmented information.  This was a decision designed to protect Mr. Trump from embarrassing domestic political activity.  We do not know how many other conversations or documents are improperly classified in order to protect the president from his own actions and words by hiding them from the public and government officials that might object to such activity.

These are serious allegations that cannot be brushed away.  They certainly deserve a full investigation.  One can than decide for oneself whether or not the facts as they are uncovered deserve impeachment or not.

In that discussion, remember that a lot of smoke is going to be blown to try and hide the real transgressions.  Some will take a narrow legal approach that no U.S. laws were actually broken.  Others will argue that a president has the Constitutional right to conduct foreign policy in any manner that they choose.  Some will argue it was “just a phone call” to a country that no one cares about.  Others will argue that we as citizens are naive if we don’t think that this is how it is always done.  Some will simply argue that there is nothing to see here, please move along.

We have a national security interest in Ukraine because if Russia gets away with its aggression, Russia has ambitions concerning other “traditional” Russian areas such as the Baltic states.  As members of NATO, any attack on the Baltic states is an attack on all members of NATO, including the U.S.

I simply say that the President of the United States, by his own admission and corroborated by Mr. Giuliani and others, used his office to involve a foreign government in our national elections in an attempt to personally benefit from another nation’s activities at the expense of our own national security.

To ignore it is to condone it.