Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse



Never mind the logical inconsistency of Trump’s analysis. (If Bloomberg’s bid really is “hopeless,” wouldn’t that be reason enough for his “foolhardy and unsuspecting Democrat rivals” to “remain silent,” regardless of what he says he will do with his money later?) The entire tweet is an exercise is wishful thinking. Trump insists that Bloomberg is tricking Democrats by pledging to spend on the party’s behalf and predicts that if he loses the nomination he will feel like such a “clown” that he will renege on his promise.

But that’s how Trump would behave. The president is projecting his own personality onto Bloomberg because he doesn’t want the former New York City mayor, who is roughly 17 times as rich Trump, to “spend money helping whoever the Democrat nominee is” — and hurting Trump’s own reelection chances.

In other words, Trump is afraid.
 


I don't blame President Trump for his angst and bitterness over his impeachment by the House of Representatives. In his mind, he has done "nothing wrong" and not acted outside the constitutional powers vested in him and so his impeachment should not have come to pass. He believes that the president can legally extract personal concessions from the recipients of foreign aid, and he also believes that he can legally order his subordinates to ignore congressional subpoenas.

Hence, his public denunciations of his Senate trial as a charade, a joke and a hoax. His trial is not a charade or a joke or a hoax. It is deadly serious business based on well-established constitutional norms.

The House of Representatives -- in proceedings in which the president chose not to participate -- impeached Trump for abuse of power and contempt of Congress. The abuse consists of his efforts to extract a personal political "favor" from the president of Ukraine as a precondition to the delivery of $391 million in military aid. The favor he wanted was an announcement of a Ukrainian investigation of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden and his son Hunter.

The Government Accountability Office -- a nonpartisan entity in the federal government that monitors how the feds spend tax revenue -- has concluded that Trump's request for a favor was a violation of law because only Congress can impose conditions on government expenditures. So, when the president did that, he usurped Congress' role and acted unlawfully.

But, did he act criminally? Is it constitutionally necessary for the House to point to a specific federal crime committed by the president in order to impeach him and trigger a Senate trial?

...

Where does all this leave us at the outset of Trump's Senate trial?

It leaves us with valid, lawful, constitutional arguments for Trump's impeachment that he ought to take seriously. That is, unless he knows he will be acquitted because Republican senators have told him so. Whoever may have whispered that into his ear is unworthy of sitting as a juror and has violated the oath of "impartial justice" and fidelity to the Constitution and the law.

What is required for removal of the president? A demonstration of presidential commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, of which in Trump's case the evidence is ample and uncontradicted.
 
Back
Top