David Corn: House Dems So Focused on Ukraine That They're Overlooking Another Impeachable Offense

[babylonsister]

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/10/house-democrats-are-so-focused-on-ukraine-that-theyre-overlooking-another-impeachable-offense/

House Democrats Are So Focused on Ukraine That They’re Overlooking Another Impeachable Offense
It’s an allegation that Trump committed a stunning act of betrayal.
David Corn


This is the way things work now: Donald Trump is credibly reported to have given aid and comfort to an enemy that attacked the United States—and this allegation, several days later, is not part of the news cycle or the scandal that is fueling the impeachment drive on Capitol Hill. The story of the most profound betrayal a president can commit has vanished from the national discourse. And that is partly because of the Democrats.

Last Friday night, the Washington Post published a stunning article reporting that during an Oval Office meeting in May 2017, Trump told Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then–Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak that Trump was unconcerned about Moscow’s attack on the 2016 presidential election. Trump noted the Russians that their assault on the United States was no big deal because the United States did the same in other countries, according to three former officials. It was at this meeting that Trump, as had been previously reported, revealed highly classified information to his Russian visitors and said that his firing of FBI chief James Comey the previous day had relieved “great pressure” on him. Yet Trump’s comments dismissing the importance of the Russian attack—which, according to the US intelligence community, was mounted in part to help Trump win the White House—now stands as the most significant moment of that gathering, where Trump and the two Russians were photographed smiling.

The Post noted that after this discussion, White House officials took steps to keep Trump’s comments from becoming public, and limited distribution of a memo summarizing the conversation to only a few officials with the highest security clearances. The memo was kept from officials who normally would have access to this sort of report. (The newspaper also reported it was unclear whether the memo was hidden in the supersecret White House server, as were documents related to those Trump interactions with Ukraine that are now the subject of the impeachment inquiry.)

It has long been assumed that Trump’s meeting with Lavrov and Kislyak was in keeping with Trump’s stated desire to get past the 2016 election and Russia’s interference. But Trump telling the Russians he did not care about the attack goes much further. That would mark a dereliction of his primary duty as president: to protect the nation. The US intelligence community, the report of special counsel Robert Mueller, and two congressional investigations (led by Republicans) have each declared that Moscow covertly waged extensive information warfare against the United States to subvert American democracy. Yet here was Trump sending a message to the foreign adversary that staged this attack that he was indifferent about it—that Russia could get away with it and perhaps do so again. Certainly, Moscow could have read Trump’s I-don’t-care comment as an invitation for future underhanded intervention.

snip//

Perhaps zeroing in on the Ukraine scandal and Trump’s moblike abuse of power is the practical decision for House Democrats and investigators. It’s new; it’s manageable. It’s not muddied up the way the Trump-Russia controversy has become (due to the years-long disinformation campaign mounted by Trump and his cultists). Yet this means Trump is being let off the hook for a monumental act of perfidy. Consider this: The president of the United States, according to this report, essentially countenanced an attack on the United States. What could warrant impeachment more? But this story comes and then it goes. Only in the era of Trump would a possible act of treason on the part of the president be considered a second-tier matter and become lost in the swirl of tweets and other outrageous misdeeds.

[Hoyt]

1. True, but as Eugene Robinson just pointed out on MSNBC,

"There's so much impeachable stuff coming out right now, you gotta draw the line somewhere" (something like that). The panel was ROFL.

[Perseus]

8. Yes, but that one is clear treason, it should not be left out

He needs to pay for his treason. I think his first punishment is going to be when he finds out that Putin will not take him, Putin doesn't want that fool in Russia, the Russian citizens don't want that fool either. Hmm, who would actually want that fool? Most probably nobody, not even the USA when we are done with investigations, impeachment and indictments, but I guess we will have to keep him caged in a cell. He has nothing to offer anyone, he is not the billionaire he claims to be, he is most probably so full of debt that he may be broke.

[abqtommy]

2. I realize that there's a long list of tRUMP impeachable offenses

Last edited Thu Oct 3, 2019, 05:23 PM - Edit history (1)

and we need to list them all. However, I'm not an experienced lawyer and I have to leave it to those Democrats who are to come up with the best way forward on this impeachment business.

[gratuitous]

3. I'm concerned about the narrowness of the scope as well

With all the criming Trump has done and is doing, zeroing in on just one transgression is bothersome. One basket holding all the eggs, as it were.

On the other hand, this could be a "test case" sort of thing. This high crime or misdemeanor is pretty out in the open, there isn't much debate about the facts, and the conclusion that this is an impeachable offense is readily warranted. What the Senate does with an impeachment referral is on them and the Majority Leader. If McConnell shines it on, the House will have its answer as to how any articles of impeachment would be received by the Senate. Does it let Trump off the hook? Sure. But it won't be the Democrats who failed their oath of office.

[Perseus]

9. I don't think it is as narrow as you think, there are a few committees and each one is addressing

a different issue. I know we need like 100 committees to address everything, but if they can come up with six proofs of impeachment, that should be good enough. One of them has to be the treason talked about in the article.

[gratuitous]

13. I don't know what's going to happen

Rumors that the impeachment inquiry will be done by Thanksgiving, one article impeachment to be referred to the Senate, and countless other tidbits persuade me that nobody knows exactly how this is going to proceed. I think there are several overt acts that could result in another article of impeachment, but where the evidence and the testimony lead is anybody's guess right now.

The other side of that coin, then, is that the House isn't locked into one course of action. Both Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Schiff have shown themselves to be able to stand against the pressure to hurry their process. Some people are pressing for a quick resolution because they want Trump gone, others are pressing so that the Democrats make a mistake and Trump gets off scot-free. No choice but to trust.

[Chemisse]

4. If it's not clear and focused, Trump could win his argument that the Dems are just out to get him.

Nancy is totally right. We have one glaring example of his crimes with Ukraine. He has admitted it; he has released evidence of it and there is full whistleblower support of it. They don't even NEED the testimony of all the people who are refusing to testify, but the refusal is further compounding of the initial crimes. It is a crime that everybody can understand and it's happening right out in the open.

Trump is twisting in the wind over it. He is flailing, committing cover-up crimes and witness-threatening crimes in full view of the nation, and even repeated this very Ukraine crime with China today (minus the blackmail).

Adding other components - particularly from the realm of the Mueller report - would confuse and overwhelm the general public and risk turning them off to the whole process.

[iluvtennis]

5. We need to proceed with incremental "baby steps" - this aid and comfort to Russia can be next. nt

[Pepsidog]

6. Q. How does Trump get away with treason? A. Fox

[ffr]

7. And what's even scarier is the fact, with all the stonewalling, this is what little we know

Imagine the horrifying truth about all we don't.

The tRump treason cabal must be stopped at all costs!!!!!!

[MBS]

10. I agree that the argument needs to stay focused, but

Corn also makes an important point.

Ever since I first saw that 2017 photo of Trump yucking it up with Lavrov and Kislyak in the Oval Office (an impression made even worse by knowledge of his remarks about Comey), I've been seriously spooked.
And now, the conversation turns out (unsurprisingly) to be even worse than first reported. This latest revelation really IS "a monumental act of perfidy." In fact, it's worse than the Ukraine scandal. . . especially when placed into context of Trump's secret conversations with and strangely fawning and submissive attitude to Putin. At minimum, the Democrats must keep poking at this, and have it ready to use when the time comes, because, it truly is, as Corn said, "the most profound betrayal" of all.

[CaptainTruth]

11. So the articles of impeachment have been finalized? How did I miss that?

[Garrett78]

12. I agree with Elizabeth Drew, who was interviewed by Lawrence last night.

Dems should bring multiple articles of impeachment, even if it means the process takes a little longer. To let slide emoluments clause violations or that which David Corn is referencing sets a dangerous precedent, and let's force Republicans to condone 3 or 4 or 5 impeachable offenses.

[patphil]

14. I would not be surprised if this is included in the articles of impeachment.