Everybody hates a Monday morning quarterback. But, hey, it’s just Sunday morning … so I’m sure everyone will be completely cool if I use this opportunity to criticize how Democrats in the House handled the impeachment.
Don’t get me wrong, there was plenty to like. That’s particularly true of the time before the Intelligence Committee, where chair Adam Schiff not only handled the process and Republican stall tactics with aplomb, but delivered some of the most rousing, inspirations opening and closing commentary this side of pick-your-favorite-Kennedy. And the fact witnesses before that committee were genuinely good. In fact, there were some genuine, iconic, heroes in that group, from Ambassador Bill Taylor defining decency and dedication, to Fiona Hill instantly penciling her name into the “Next Secretary of State” line of every upcoming Democratic ticket, anyone tuning in to see the hearings got a chance to see just how astoundingly competent most State Department and National Security Counsel members really are … a stark contrast, unfortunately, to many of those to whom they must report.
Those witness hearings also had some genuinely problematic witnesses, like Gordon Sondland, who lied about almost everything in his first hearing, lied about a majority of things in his in updated statement, and was still lying about at least half of everything in his final appearance before the Intelligence Committee as he looked desperately for a way out of a hole he had been instrumental in digging. Unfortunately, Ambassador Kurt Volker was almost as bad. It doesn’t matter how many people said nice things about Volker or how many people respected his years at State, he was clearly lying in his testimony to Congress, downplaying the role that he played in both explaining to the Ukrainians exactly what Trump expected of them and his own role in personally writing for Ukraine a statement that satisfied Trump’s demands by including a mention of both Joe Biden and the Crowdstrike conspiracy theory. Also, the claim from both Sondland and Volker that they didn’t understand the connection between Burisma and Joe Biden wasn’t just a blatant lie, it was such an obvious and ridiculous lie that it demanded a slapdown. And no, FIona Hill pointing out how impossible this claim was during her testimony was not sufficient.
However, things were a long, long way from effective when the process moved to the Judiciary Committee. Not only did those hearings lack the punch of the Intelligence Committee hearings by not having witnesses, Democratic representatives were surprisingly ineffective at punching back against Republicans who, honestly, were fighting with one arm behind their backs. The east argument for Republicans would be one along the “yeah, he screwed up, but it’s not impeachment-worthy,” but Trump wouldn’t not tolerate that approach. He demanded that Republicans treat his call as “perfect,” forcing them to take an approach where their only option was to try and sell the same conspiracy theories that he tried to press on Ukraine.
Not only did this put Republicans on ground that was less solid than over-watered Jell-O, they openly compounded the ridiculousness with some really, really awful moments. For example, there was the point where Doug Collins practically defined the term “unforced error” by coming out of nowhere with utterly unfounded claims that some part of Ukrainian government had “gone rogue” and knew about the hold on military assistance, but wasn’t telling anyone in Kyiv. And there was the whole effort on the Republican Rep’s part to create an excuse for Trump’s hold — “five critical meetings” or “two important bills.” Not only did neither of them match with Trump’s previous statements, not only could they not keep the claims straight from one use to the next, but the basic idea didn’t even begin to align with the actual timeline of events. Democrats did do some good things — such as reminding the public of Trump’s appeal to China and Mick Mulvaney’s open confession. They just didn’t do enough. Also, every single break seemed to include Republicans forming up outside the meeting room to deliver their talking points to media while Democrats appeared to simply disperse. Much as I loved Jerry Nadler’s late-night gavel flare, the Judiciary Committee hearings were pretty much what Trump wanted them to be.
A part of that comes back to my big complaint all along — which is that Democrats also fought with one hand behind their back. I understand the tendency to focus on Trump’s attempt to smear Joe Biden. It’s easy to understand, and clearly out of line. But by not pointing out the true nature of what Trump was asking when he said this:
“I would like you to do us a favor though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it.”
Republicans weren’t just able to make Trump’s request about the 2016 election seem reasonable, but made it possible to make the Biden request seem more reasonable. Democrats needed to take about ten minutes to explain what Trump was really demanding. And they needed to do it about every sixty minutes of every hearing.
In general, Democrats were not consistent enough in getting across the idea that Trump was attacking both Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party in general, and Ukraine as a nation, and offering exoneration to Vladimir Putin, and once again denying the conclusions of every intelligence agency in the United States. That effort began months before the July phone call, it continued months after the July phone call, and it did not end until Trump was aware that Congress had officially launched an investigation. Except that’s not quite true, because it really hasn’t ended.
Okay then … this has been your Sunday morning lesson in why you will not be sorry when I stop doing these things. And now, let’s read some pundits.
Jonathan Chait on why the hearings really did go by too fast.
New York Magazine
One of the few cogent points Republicans have made during the impeachment hearings is that the process is being rushed for political reasons. The White House has withheld all documents and witnesses, and rather than wait for the legal system to sort out the dispute, Democrats have plunged ahead. “Why is court not an appropriate remedy?” asks Colorado representative Ken Buck. Republicans are right: The impeachment vote is proceeding without the benefit of all possible evidence.
On the other hand, a small part of me wonders if perhaps this process objection is being offered in bad faith. Maybe by the time the courts have ruled on every last one of Trump’s legal appeals, the election will already be over, or at least will be so close at hand that Republicans will switch over to insisting that the voters should decide the matter. I am sorry to let such a cynical thought even enter my mind.
Yes, it is possible that I started reading Chait’s piece first, then decided what I was going to do on the front page of this post. But that doesn’t at all mean I stole his idea. Nope.
Fortunately, there is an easy compromise. Republicans, as they keep telling us, are driven by a desire to see all the available evidence and follow every lead, however long it takes. Democrats want to be sure they register a historic judgment on Trump’s malfeasance before they can be accused of interfering with an election already underway. The solution is to vote to impeach Trump now on the basis of the incredibly damning and thorough evidence already at hand, while still pursuing the investigation. After all, there’s nothing that prevents the House from impeaching a president twice.
Well there is — it’s called a limited amount of guts. But I do like that Schiff has made it clear his investigation is moving right along. Another cheer for Schiff. There’s a really good reason why Republicans are out to get him. He’s been that good.
Will Bunch is already conceding that the Senate is going to acquit Trump.
Philadelphia Inquirer
It’s been quite a week on the impeachment front — a 9-hour-plus, bitterly contentious hearing before the House Judiciary Committee that focused (or attempted to, anyway) on evidence of President Trump’s high crimes and misdemeanors, followed just 14 hours later with the high-stakes rollout of two articles of impeachment. The case against Trump could get a committee vote by Thursday, with the full House voting before Christmas. ...
It’s tough but fair to say that the president’s volume-cranked-to-11 allies on Capitol Hill, his authoritarian Roy-Cohn-but-worse pit bull attorney general, and of course Trump himself have been frantically scooping up the postcards before anyone with half a brain can see them. For weeks, the Republican Party and its quasi-official house organ, the Fox News Channel, have been talking the reams of truth and feeding it into a shredder — spinning an alternate reality for their 62 million in which the president’s extortionate call with Ukraine and his hold on vital military aid were “perfect” and the IG report says the 180-degree opposite.
I’ve chopped a big chunk out of Buch’s piece and not really done him justice here, because he tells a fascinating historical story that informs his thoughts about how the impeachment should be handled. But since there’s no way to get across the idea without including a lot more of the piece than I should, the obvious answer is … go read it all.
Nancy LeTourneau points out something very damn obvious that needs to be said anyway.
Washington Monthly
During Thursday’s debate about the impeachment articles against Donald Trump, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee wanted to talk about anything but the evidence against the president. Dartunorro Clark reports on one of the things they did want to talk about.
Republicans dragged Hunter Biden’s name through the mud Thursday at the House Judiciary Committee meeting on two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump…
During the committee meeting, Gaetz introduced an amendment to strike a reference of former Vice President Joe Biden from the articles of impeachment and put in Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, and Hunter Biden, who sat on the board of that company.
Commenting about the hearing on CNN, Jeffrey Toobin suggested that poses a dilemma for journalists.
“The idea that we are sitting here…debating the impeachment of the president of the United States, and over and over again we get how all these questions about the behavior of Hunter Biden, the president’s perhaps most likely opponent, the son of [Joe Biden] and I just don’t know what our responsibility is as journalists because it’s not the point, but this is the news. And this is what’s there,” Toobin said.
Here’s a suggestion for Toobin: journalists could remind everyone that Hunter Biden is not running for president. Joe Biden is the one who currently leads the Democratic primary, and his record is very clear.
The most disgusting moments of the whole impeachment inquiry involved Matt Gaetz … why is that not at all surprising?
Art Cullen has made his decision … and it’s kind of a surprise.
Storm Lake Times
Elizabeth Warren spoke volumes to us when she launched her Presidential campaign in January with a swing through Council Bluffs, Sioux City and Storm Lake in Northwest Iowa, the most conservative and rural part of the state, planting her flag and declaring that nobody will be left behind.
“If Democrats are going to build a grassroots movement, they have to go where the people are — all the people, not just some,” Warren told us then. “I grew up in Oklahoma. Your main drag looks like mine in Wetumka. The core values we shared are the core values that Americans believe in — they want their kids to have a fighting chance to build a future here.”
Warren promised us that she would come back — and she did because she said she would, despite scheduler protestations.
Previously, Cullen has seemed to pull for Amy Klobuchar, or Pete Buttigieg, and seemed to be stanchly expecting a moderate to rise to the front in Iowa. With Buttigieg’s numbers improving over the last month, and Warren down from her peak, Cullen .. managed to surprise me. And he’s focusing on one aspect of those famous plans of Warren’s that many of us may have missed.
Warren is charting a course that uses agriculture to lead the battle against climate change by paying farmers to sequester carbon and prevent surface water pollution. She will lead the charge to get agriculture off the chemical jones that is killing the Gulf of Mexico and stealing our precious soil. She will pursue a trade agenda that enforces environmental and labor protections. And she will not forget about rural hospitals, nursing homes and mental health clinics being blown out by Wall Street investors paying K Street lobbyists. She will end the terror on immigrants who make Storm Lake and Sioux City home and rejuvenate rural communities.
I didn’t say it was a bad surprise.
Charles Pierce still felt the impact, after all those hours and days of hearings.
Esquire
On Friday morning, for one bright and evanescent moment, that hour arrived for El Caudillo del Mar-a-Lago, and it was an hour you could see coming from the moment they activated the golden escalator in 2015.
This president* brought the taste for carrion common to modern vulture capitalism into our politics. He brought the rabid wolverine ethos of Manhattan real estate into our government. This was to nobody’s surprise. Corruption is all there is to the man. It’s what gives him life. It is his animating spirit. It’s the dark North Star by which he’s always navigated through a world he’d been taught was every bit as corrupt as he is.
Look at the faces who brought down the Hour of the Founders—all Democrats, because that’s the way of things these days. Val Demings, a former cop from Florida, who always looks as though she’s ready to cuff a dude and take him downtown. Lucy McBath of Georgia, who seven years ago was a flight attendant raising a young son, until that son was murdered in his car for the dual crimes of being black and playing music loudly. This brought Lucy McBath to activism and, ultimately, to the Congress and a seat on the House Judiciary Committee. That's where she got to pass the kind of formal, dignified justice on a president* whose approach to the Constitution he swore to uphold is roughly the same as the attitude toward hip-hop music held by her son’s murderer. In a very real and modern sense, Lucy McBath is a Founder now.
Okay, forget everything I said. Just read Pierce.
Joan Walsh on the GOP’s giant, endless whine.
The Nation
This is what they do. We shouldn’t be surprised.
After three constitutional scholars spent hours making an unimpeachable case for impeaching Donald Trump, while George Washington University’s Jonathan Turley vainly argued otherwise, the whole exercise was upstaged by the well-greased GOP grievance machine. You heard about it: In arguing that Trump was behaving more like a monarch than a democratically elected head of state, Stanford University’s Pamela Karlan quipped, “The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he cannot make him a baron.”
Cue the furies! White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham called the joke “classless,” while first lady Melania Trump harrumphed in a tweet: “A minor child deserves privacy and should be kept out of politics. Pamela Karlan, you should be ashamed of your very angry and obviously biased public pandering, and using a child to do it.” Vice President Mike Pence, brown noser in chief, grabbed the baton: “Impeachment hearings reached a new low,” he intoned, with Karlan’s Barron comment. “Democrats should be ashamed. Enough is enough.” Sadly, ABC’s David Muir even included it in his World News Tonight introduction: “The moment one witness brings up the president’s youngest son—did she cross the line?” (Spoiler alert: No, she didn’t.)
No one is allowed to speak the name of a teenager, because that’s just terrible. Unless that teenager attempts to do something good for the world, in which case it’s fine to destroy them in any way you want. Right Greta? How about it, Parkway kids?
Of course, Karlan’s Barron comment wouldn’t have made headlines without the boost from the teenager’s alleged protectors. If anybody invaded the boy’s privacy, it was the people who blew this up into a big story. Karlan quickly apologized (she didn’t need to), but the right wing, a few mainstream cable hosts, and David Muir had the distraction they needed.
That moment may have been the low point of the whole process. Not Karlan’s statement. Karlan was fine. The way the press treated the complaint seriously … that was the low point.
Michael Tomasky is one of those drawing dire warnings from the UK election.
Daily Beast
I say let’s be careful about hot takes from the UK election. Jeremy Corbyn was a unique nincompoop. He was never suited to be a national leader of a major political party in a major industrial democracy. He was an ineffectual backbencher and should have remained so.
So I’m not hot on the “this is a disaster for Bernie Sanders” line. The result sure isn’t good for Sanders, who still has no shortage of his own kinds of limitations. But there are differences between the two men. Sanders has been a backbencher most of his life, too, so that’s a fair point of comparison. But when Sanders did rise to the national spotlight, at least he showed he can hold his place in it. Corbyn always looked to me like he was secretly wondering why the bloody ’ell all these people are suddenly listening to me. Also, Sanders is Jewish, and is far from a knee-jerk, left-wing, oh-no-I’m-just-anti-Zionist anti-Semite of the kind one finds much more frequently on the European left than the American version.
Feel free to read the rest if like, I’m going to stop there and just give you my own barely lukewarm, my water heater has a broken element (really) take, which is — there’s nothing to learn here. Nothing. The connection between Brexit and Trump isn’t some magical rubber band, they’re two nickles being flipped that happened to come up screaming heads.
If there’s anything to be learned from the UK, it’s that people just wanted the agony to stop. Does anyone think the U.S. will actually be less chaotic if Trump wins reelection?
Alexandra Petri has some suggestions for the man about to catch what the House is throwing.
Washington Post
Dear Mitch,
Thank you so much for being so extremely willing to coordinate with us here at the President’s Team! Whatever it is that has made you entirely alter your position about how much power the Senate has to check the president since, uh, 2016, we appreciate you! Here is the president’s dictated list of requests for his Senate Trial. Obviously, there are a couple of ways this could go, so we wanted to get the options to you early!
First, the president wants to have the whistleblower come in, somehow, along with Adam Schiff. The whistleblower should deliver a long speech and blow three sorrowful blasts on “its whistle” (from the president’s use of pronouns to describe the whistleblower, we gleaned that he believed the whistleblower was some sort of anthropomorphic train) and tell the world how Schiff would not let the whistleblower testify, and then rear up to its full height, point at Schiff and say, “This is the Guilty Man!” Then the whistleblower would turn to the camera, say, “Mr. President, I am sorry, you are better than America deserves” and “chug” mournfully away to rejoin “its friend Thomas” or even brick itself up inside a wall to show remorse. (This request included a lengthy rant about how whistleblower protections are not relevant since trains have the American people on their side.)
I think the White House will be contacting Petri. She’s clearly on the receiving end of leaks.
We’re short a few this morning because some of the pundit folk have already gone off to their mountain retreats to sip toddies until it’s time to break out the champagne. We’ll see them all back sometime in the spring, before they head off for their summer in the Hamptons. And no, I’m not jealous of major newspaper columnists. Of course not.