Tag Archives: impeachment

national news

Hoping for the truth; fearing that we’ll get a circus

I have every intention of watching as much as I can of the public hearing on whether the U.S. House of Representatives should impeach Donald J. Trump. The hearing will convene Wednesday morning.

Believe it or not, I am going to keep an open mind. Yes, I believe the president has committed impeachable offenses. However, I want to hear from the principal witnesses themselves what they knew, what they heard and saw and whether they — as men and women who are closest to the situation — have drawn any conclusions about what the president has done to deserve impeachment.

OK. That all said, I have a fear that some House Intelligence Committee members will have another agenda. They will seek to destroy the credibility of these witnesses. I am referring to Republicans on the panel. Their strategy is shaping up: attack the critics and do not seek to defend the president as a man of high honor and integrity, as someone who would never do the things that have been alleged.

And what has been alleged? As I understand it, there are allegations that Trump sought a political favor from the president of Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy sought weapons from the United States to help him fight Russia-backed rebels; Trump said he wanted a “favor, though” before he would send the weapons to Ukraine. The “favor” involved obtaining critical information about Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; Biden is running for president and might oppose Trump in 2020.

Abuse of power? Violation of the presidential oath? Obstruction of justice? It’s all on the table.

I am hoping to hear from these individuals who were “on the call” to tell the world what they heard. These individuals are patriots, career diplomats, military personnel. They, too, take oaths to defend the nation and to serve the Constitution.

Intelligence Committee Republicans, though, seem hell bent on destroying their credibility.

I want some discernment to come from these public hearings. Republicans have clamored for public testimony. The impeachment inquiry has gone according to rules established by GOP House leadership. So now the hearings are going to unveiled in full public view.

I fear the worst, which is that the hearings could become a sideshow.

I will hope for the best, which will be that dedicated public servants will be able to clear out all the rhetorical underbrush and reveal what we need to know.

I am all ears for as long as it takes.

national news

Beware of social media lie: Pelosi didn’t rob SSI fund

Social media can be fun if it isn’t abused. When abuse occurs, it becomes a deadly toxin.

A social media lie has been making the rounds about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and this idiotic notion that she grabbed $2.4 billion from a Social Security fund to pay for the impeachment inquiry under way in the House of Representatives.

It ain’t true. Yet it’s gone viral.

My gut reaction when I first heard of it was: Wait a second; the speaker doesn’t have that kind of authority. The speaker cannot move money around unilaterally.

Fact-checkers have debunked the notion. Pelosi is too smart a politician, too adroit and too shrewd to even consider doing something such as that.

This, therefore, presents a profound example of how social media can be weaponized. Let us take greater care when reading this nonsense.

Factcheck.org lays it out here.

How about we all just settle down and let this process play out?

national news

Trump is ‘truthful,’ says ex-UN envoy … wow!

Photo by John Lamparski/Getty Images

I suppose it’s all right to have different points of view on important people, depending on your persuasion or perhaps even depending on how you are tracking your own political future.

What does one make of former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley declaring that Donald Trump is a “truthful” individual?

That’s a serious head-scratcher. Then again, Nikki Haley is believed to be seeking to run for president one day and just might be positing some notions that will put her in the good graces of the man who holds the office at this moment.

Haley is pushing back on calls to impeach the president. She told the “Today” show that Trump has been truthful in his dealings with her. Haley said Trump always “listened” when the two of them spoke and that he was good to work with.

Well, OK. Whatever you say, Mme. Ambassador.

I just cannot get past the countless examples of what I call gratuitous lying on Trump’s part. You know, when he lies when he doesn’t need to lie. He just makes things up. Says whatever rests in that noggin of his. It’s big stuff and dumb stuff.

The big stuff? How about when he said he lost “many friends” on 9/11 when he never attended a single funeral in the wake of that tragedy. The dumb stuff? Let’s look at when he said his father was born in Germany, when he was born in New York City.

This president is “truthful”? Hardly.

local news, national news

‘Inappropriate’ but not ‘impeachable’?

I long have thought that Mac Thornberry was a smart man, even though I have harbored some deep personal — and largely private — objections to many of the public policy positions he has taken.

However, the Clarendon, Texas, Republican member of Congress has, um, inflicted some damage to my longstanding view of his intelligence.

Thornberry went on national TV Sunday and said that it is “inappropriate” for a president to “ask a foreign leader to investigate a political rival,” But … then he said it is not “impeachable.”

Allow me to split a hair or two here.

The term “inappropriate” doesn’t necessarily equal “illegal.” However, presidents can be impeached for “inappropriate” behavior. I happen to believe, though, that Donald Trump broke the law when he sought foreign government help in investigating a political rival, Joe Biden.

I’ll stipulate that I am not a lawyer. Thornberry did earn a law degree from the University of Texas; he has called himself a “recovering lawyer.” However, I have read the Constitution, as I am sure has Thornberry. I interpret the Constitution as declaring that presidents cannot solicit foreign governments for political help. Donald Trump did that very thing in that infamous phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

So, has the president abused the power of his office? Did he commit an actual crime? I believe he has done both things. Abusing of power is impeachable; violating the law, not to mention his oath of office, certainly is impeachable.

That makes it far worse than “inappropriate,” as Thornberry has described it.

My disappointment in Thornberry is palpable. He was my congressman for more than 20 years when my wife and I lived in Amarillo. He took office the same week I arrived in Amarillo to begin my tenure as editorial page editor of the Globe-News. I had a good professional relationship with him and his staff.

He has announced he won’t seek re-election in 2020. What he does after he leaves office is a mystery to me. I wish him well. I only wish he would interpret Donald Trump’s egregious misbehavior differently than what he has expressed.

It’s clearly possible, as Thornberry has demonstrated, that people can reach vastly different conclusions while witnessing the same act. Rep. Thornberry has determined that Trump’s actions were “inappropriate,” but not “impeachable.” I believe Trump broke the law and, therefore, earned an early exit from the White House.

national news

Don’t expect GOP heroes to emerge in public impeachment hearing

I feel the need to offer a sad scenario.

It is this: Do not hold your breath waiting for any Republican members of Congress to emerge as heroes during the public questioning of witnesses in the impeachment inquiry into Donald J. Trump.

Previous impeachment proceedings have produced congressmen and women who have crossed the aisle. I do not expect that event will occur at least in this phase of the impeachment inquiry.

Trump will get impeached by the House. That’s almost a lead-pipe cinch. The public hearings that commence on Wednesday will become a circus. How do we know that? Consider that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has installed Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio on the House Intelligence Committee. Jordan has emerged as arguably the most vocal Trump sycophant in the House and I believe he will do all he can do to divert this probe away from the issue at hand.

And it is: whether Donald Trump abused the immense power of his office for personal political gain by seeking a favor from Ukraine in exchange for weaponry that Ukrainians want to use against their Russia-back insurgents.

Will any Republicans on the Intelligence panel step forward the way, say, they did during the Watergate hearings of 1973 and 1974? Nope.

Remember it was GOP Sen. Howard Baker of Tennessee who asked back then, “What did the president know and when did he know it?”

Then came the million-dollar question from fellow Tennessean, Fred Thompson, who was GOP legal counsel on the Senate select committee investigating Watergate: “Are you aware,” Thompson asked White House aide Alexander Butterfield, “of any listening devices in the White House?” Thompson, being the good lawyer he was, knew the answer would be “yes,” that Butterfield was aware of such devices.

It was effectively game over at that point.

If only there could be some political heroism emerge today.

national news

Past the point of no return with this POTUS

I have a declaration to make regarding the president of the United States. It doesn’t give me any joy to say this, but I must say it nonetheless.

It now appears highly unlikely that I ever will be able to put the word “President” in front of “Trump” for as long as this man occupies the nation’s highest office.

A few critics of this blog have called me on this policy I have invoked since Trump became president. They dislike my references to Trump without attaching his elected title in front of his last name.

Too bad.

Truly, though, I had hoped for a turnaround in the president’s conduct of his office. I had wanted to be able to respect the man enough to refer to him the way others have done. The media have done their part in bestowing the title in front of the president’s name. That’s their call. I am making my own call on my own blog. Why? Because I can.

Trump’s behavior since the day he announced his candidacy for president has been abysmal, deplorable, reprehensible, disgusting, disgraceful … stop me now! The list of pejoratives is endless.

He’s going to be impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. The Senate will put him on trial for high crimes and misdemeanors. He stands a good chance of surviving a Senate trial only because there do not appear to be enough Senate Republicans who will muster the courage to stand for the rule of law and vote to convict him of the charges the House impeachment articles will bring.

The backdrop for all of this is unique. Trump will be the first president to be impeached who is facing a re-election campaign. No one can predict with any certainty how the election will turn out when the votes are counted on Nov. 3, 2020.

As much as I wanted it to be different, I must declare that Donald John Trump Sr. has crossed a proverbial line of demarcation. I just do not see an instance that in the foreseeable future that will allow me to speak of this man the way I have spoken about other presidents with whom I have disagreed.

Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush 41 and 43 all conducted themselves with dignity and class — even while they have endured extreme controversy and, yes, scandal.

The current president has not. He won’t change his ways. Given all that has transpired since he rode down that escalator in Trump Tower to announce his entry into political life, I cannot imagine a scenario that would allow me to use the words “President” and “Trump” consecutively.

national news

Sen. Graham … let the House do its job and then do your own

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham keeps yammering out of both sides of his mouth.

The South Carolina Republican once declared that Donald Trump was unfit for the presidency, then he said if allegations about a quid pro quo with Ukraine were trouble that it would be “very troubling.” Now he says without knowing the identity of the whistleblower whose memo triggered the impeachment inquiry into Trump isn’t known, then an impeachment of Trump is “dead on arrival” in the Senate.

Sen. Graham needs to be made to understand that the whistleblower’s ID is protected under the whistleblower statute, even though some media outlets have reported the name of someone purported to be the individual who’s ratted out misbehavior in the White House.

House committees hearing the inquiry aren’t going to call the whistleblower to testify. The Democratic chair of the Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, says it would be redundant and unnecessary. He also worries that it would create a distraction and divert attention away from the subject of the inquiry, which happens to be Graham’s newest BFF, Donald Trump.

The issue is clear cut: Did the president demand a quid pro quo from Ukraine … political dirt on Joe Biden in exchange for weapons to use against Russia-backed rebels? The House has heard from plenty of witnesses who say that Trump did that very thing. The nation will get to hear them say it out loud and in public this week.

The House is doing its job legally.

Let the House proceed, Sen. Graham.

International news

May Day celebration … in Russia, Mr. POTUS? Really?

Vladimir Putin has extended an invitation to Donald Trump. The Russian president wants the U.S. president to attend a May 9, 2020 event commemorating the 75th year since the end of World War II fighting in Europe.

Trump is considering whether to attend. He calls the anniversary of the Allied victory a “very big deal.” He also noted the event occurs in the middle of a presidential campaign, in which he will be a principal participant.

Oh, the quandary.

Normally I would suggest the president go to Russia to help our World War II allies celebrate the end of European combat during that terrible conflict.

Except, consider this:

  • The president is likely to be impeached because he sought a political favor from Ukraine in exchange for weapons that are slated to go to Ukraine, which is battling rebels backed by Russia. He held up the weapons that would be used against an aggressor sponsored by Russians.
  •  Russia attacked our electoral system in 2016 and is doing so in advance of the 2020 election. That’s the view of our nation’s intelligence network, which Trump has dismissed and disparaged.
  •  Russians are involved in the fighting in Syria. Trump has pulled out our forces from that region, putting our Kurdish allies in jeopardy, exposing them to potential harm by Russian-backed Syrian forces.

So, with all of that as a backdrop, Donald Trump might travel to Moscow to help the Russians cheer their role in defeating the Nazis. He’ll watch the Russians display their military hardware, which is one of the usual features of their May Day ceremony.

Yes, the Russians will show off equipment similar to what they are deploying in their fight with Ukraine, which has become entangled in a U.S. political fight that is likely to result in a presidential impeachment.

Oh, and the Russians are in the midst of launching yet another attack on our electoral system.

Let me think: Should the president go to Russia to applaud the Russians’ May Day celebration? Umm. No. He shouldn’t.

economic news

Jobless rate is great … but it doesn’t negate misbehavior by POTUS

One of the dodges employed by Donald Trump’s apologists who are fighting against the impeachment tide that is splashing against the president is the strength of the national economy.

Indeed, so does the president speak to that issue.

Unemployment is at a 50-year low, Trump and The Gang tell us. They ask: “Why impeach a president who is doing such a great job on the economy?”

Here’s my answer: Because the issues relating to the president’s probable impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives have nothing to do with his performance as president, or the strength of the national economy.

The issues of grave concern center on whether the president has violated his oath of office or, as has been alleged, broken federal law.

It is the very same separation of these matters that drove Republicans to march toward impeaching President Clinton in 1998. They didn’t give a rat’s rear end about the nation’s economic health two decades ago. Did it matter to them that the federal budget was balanced on President Clinton’s watch? No. They said, with some justification, that the president perjured himself before a grand jury; he broke the law, they said and, therefore, had committed an impeachable offense.

I thought then that the impeachment was a waste of time, given that Clinton’s lie had to do with a relationship he was having with a woman who was not his wife. That relationship didn’t have a thing to do with the duties of his office.

The issues driving the pending impeachment of Donald Trump have everything to do with his conduct as president of the United States. They also have nothing to do with the jobless rate, or the growth rate of private-sector employment, or trade policy, or immigration policy or anything else on the president’s list of issues with which he must grapple.

Let’s just try to keep these matters in some perspective, shall we? The economy is doing well under Donald Trump’s watch. It’s a big deal, to be sure. It’s a tiny, infinitesimal deal, however, when we ponder this matter of impeachment.

national news

‘I mean no disrespect … ‘

I learned a long time ago that when someone says they “mean no disrespect,” they usually do mean disrespect.

So it was this week when U.S. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., stood before a Donald Trump rally crowd and bellowed that “I mean no disrespect, but it must suck to be that dumb.”

The object of his “mean no disrespect” setup? It wasn’t the guy standing next to him, which was the president of the United States.

Oh, no. It was U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who launched the impeachment inquiry into Trump’s conduct as president. The inquiry, of course, is intended to determine if the House will impeach Trump.

You and I know it will do precisely that.

Sen. Kennedy, though, wants to declare his fealty to the president. He does so by disparaging the intelligence of arguably the nation’s most adroit politician, who in my mind happens to be Speaker Pelosi.

Kennedy’s “mean no disrespect” comment, shall we say, was quite disrespectful. I am looking forward to seeing who among the nation’s leading politicians comes out of this mess with the more serious battle scars.

My hunch is that it won’t be Speaker Nancy Pelosi.