Sign in with Facebook
Helen's Reviews > The Case for Impeachment
The Case for Impeachment
by
by
This is a very useful volume was written by a historian who was one of the only people to correctly predict the electoral victory of Donald J. Trump, despite the near-unanimous consensus of polling which predicted otherwise. President Trump sent Professor Lichtman a note thanking him for his prediction; however, Trump didn't realize that Lichtman had also predicted that although Trump would be elected president, he would also be impeached.
This is a well-written, easy-to read book, which contains about ten or so editorial errors of various sorts - giving the impression that it may have been rushed to press. However, it's easy to figure out how sentences, words, etc. should have appeared so none of the snafus detract from comprehending the text. It is an engrossing book that even can be described as a page-turner, considering the current polarization in public opinion. Obviously, those who are disheartened by the election of Donald J. Trump as president, and that would be at least 2/3 of the population, will find the book a balm, and will be happy to read Lichtman's discussion of Trump's impeachable transgressions. The book thus has potentially a huge audience of eager readers, perhaps seeking solace in a dark political time. For someone who can devote several hours to reading it, the book could probably be read in a day or two. Since I can only read books in a piecemeal fashion, it took me about 4 days to read the 237 page book (not counting the footnotes). "The Case for Impeachment" would certainly constitute a page-turner for a "political junkie" or even anyone following news of the presidency today. I found this book mostly interesting, although once or twice it seemed boring - but that was only briefly. It's definitely not a slog. The author has a restrained style that is not overly "scholarly" and also inserts some judicious wit here and there. Most readers will enjoy this book - especially those who are unhappy with the results of the 2016 general election.
Professor Lichtman starts out by discussing what is impeachment, and how the wording pertaining to impeachment in the Constitution may be interpreted, as well as how the wording was arrived at, and what the significance of having rather general/vague wording means: A presidential impeachment can result from a great variety of things, not necessarily deriving from official malfeasance, criminal action such as bribery, or even political actions (as the Lewinsky scandal demonstrated). Also, grounds for impeachment are not time-limited: A president can be impeached for past wrong doing, even if, in a regular court of law, the statute of limitations for the wrong doing has expired.
The author describes in detail exactly what is the process of impeachment (of Federal officials including president). He describes how the process unfolds: Anyone, including an ordinary citizen, can request an impeachment but articles of impeachment usually originate in a House committee, and once they are voted on by the House and pass by a simple majority, then the president is impeached. An impeachment vote is similar to an indictment - it means the House has accepted the proposition that wrong-doing may have occurred, and that a trial in the Senate is warranted, to either convict or acquit the defendant (president). The impeachment verdict cannot be appealed.
Here is the wikipedia summation of how a Senate trial proceeds: "The proceedings unfold in the form of a trial, with each side having the right to call witnesses and perform cross-examinations. The House members, who are given the collective title of managers during the course of the trial, present the prosecution case, and the impeached official has the right to mount a defense with his own attorneys as well. Senators must also take an oath or affirmation that they will perform their duties honestly and with due diligence. After hearing the charges, the Senate usually deliberates in private. The U.S. Constitution requires a two-thirds majority for conviction.
The Senate enters judgment on its decision, whether that be to convict or acquit, and a copy of the judgment is filed with the Secretary of State.[4] Upon conviction in the Senate, the official is automatically removed from office and may also be barred from holding future office.[5] The removed official is also liable to criminal prosecution. The President may not grant a pardon in the impeachment case, but may in any resulting criminal case." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeach...
Obviously, this is a unique sort of proceeding, since we do not have a jury (the Senate) that does not know the defendant ahead of time, and although its deliberations are secret, as in a regular trial, it isn't clear if the vote cast by each Senator is made public, or simply the result of a secret Senate vote.
Professor Lichtman notes that an impeachment process is unique in that it is designed for one purpose only - separating an individual from their federal office. It is not a criminal or civil trial. The trial is presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and to repeat the verdict cannot be appealed. Lichtman says the trial is political in nature, that is, if the behavior or crimes or corruption etc. of a defendant have become so onerous as to be intolerable, impeachment provides an orderly way to remove the individual from office, unless the prospect of impeachment causes the person to quit first to avoid the embarrassment of a Senate trial. Once the person is impeached they lose their immunity, and can then also be prosecuted for criminal activity as called for in a regular a court of law, like any other citizen, with all due legal protections including appeals that any other defendant enjoys. Lichtman notes that in a Senate trial, the Senate acts as judge and jury, and that the Chief Justice's role is more that of a facilitator formally presiding over the process, he does not exactly run the proceedings as in a regular court case.
Lichtman also discusses the alternative method for removing presidents from the office of the presidency by means of invoking the 25th Amendment, which can temporarily replace the president by the vice-president as acting president if the president is considered disabled by the cabinet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-...
This process is described as byzantine in that the president doesn't have to agree to the recommendation for removal, and if the president continues to petition for reinstatement, that is submit a declaration, and Congress continues to vote against the president, the back and forth petitioning/voting could in theory continue indefinitely that is, as long as the now removed president would have served as president.
Here is the wikipedia summary for the Sections 3 and 4 of the 25th Amendment:
"Section 3 provides that when the President transmits a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, stating that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the Presidency, and until the President sends another written declaration to the aforementioned officers declaring himself able to resume discharging those powers and duties, the Vice President discharges those powers and duties as Acting President.
Section 4 is the only part of the amendment that has never been invoked.[25] It allows the Vice President, together with a "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide", to declare the President "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" by submitting a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. As with Section 3, the Vice President would become Acting President.
Section 4 is meant to be invoked should the President's incapacitation prevent him from discharging his duties, but he is unable or unwilling to provide the written declaration called for by Section 3. The President may resume exercising the Presidential duties by sending a written declaration to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House.
Should the Vice President and Cabinet believe the President is still "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office", they may within four days of the President's declaration submit another declaration that the President is incapacitated. If not already in session, the Congress must then assemble within 48 hours. The Congress has 21 days to decide the issue. If within the 21 days two-thirds of each house of Congress vote that the President is incapacitated, the Vice President would "continue" to be Acting President. Should the Congress resolve the issue in favor of the President, or make no decision within the 21 days allotted, then the President would "resume" discharging the powers and duties of his office. The use of the words "continue" and "resume" imply that the Vice President remains Acting President while Congress deliberates.
However, the President may again submit a written declaration of recovery to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House. That declaration could be responded to by the Vice President and the Cabinet in the same way as stated earlier. The specified 21-day Congressional procedure would start again."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-...
Historical background is provided, as to why impeachment was included in the Constitution to provide for the removal of presidents or federal judges, especially why the Founders considered the provision of an impeachment process in the Constitution crucial to the establishment of a democracy, given the experience of prior European hereditary/arbitrary governments/monarchies.
Specific instances of impeachment are discussed: The impeachment of President Andrew Johnson is examined in some detail. Interestingly, although Johnson had a disastrous presidency, and was impeached by the House, the author suggests that he may not have been convicted by the Senate because the vice-president he had selected upon ascending to the presidency, was considered worse (flightier etc).
Richard Nixon quit the presidency once he was informed he would be impeached, and Clinton's impeachment for perjury by the House and acquittal by the Senate is also discussed. There is also a discussion of an impeachment of a federal judge, where the judge was convicted and removed from office because of intemperate language, drunkenness etc.
The general discussion about impeachment though only comprises the beginning of the book. Most of the book is taken up by chapters examining a number of different reasons why Donald J. Trump may be impeached. This is really the heart of the volume, and as with other recent books I have read pertaining to politics, I shall include a number of quotes that I thought were worth noting.
The penultimate chapter is a refreshingly honest direct appeal by the author to President Trump as to how the President could change his ways now to avoid impeachment. It is realistic, forthright, but given the scale of improprieties listed in the preceding chapters of the volume, one wonders even if Trump immediately reformed himself, it would make any difference with respect to his problems. I still thought it was excellent for Lichtman to have included this direct appeal to President Trump - it also dispels any suggestion that the book is a "hatchet job" or biased, because Lichtman is giving excellent advice to Trump as to how he might avoid removal from office. One piece of advice, firing Steve Bannon, meanwhile did occur - 4 months after the book was published. Maybe Trump read the book and heeded Professor Lichtman's advice, at least insofar as the divisive/polarizing Bannon is concerned. (One can hope.) Unfortunately, though, there are too many other instances since the book appeared, wherein Trump continues true to (horrible) form, with gratuitous, immature, and destabilizing tweets, or inappropriate ad lib remarks, dog whistle comments, or even completely inappropriate speeches, such as the war mongering, threatening speech Trump gave at the United Nations on 9/17/17 http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/19/politic...
The book though ends on a hopeful note - discussing the chances of impeachment in a Republican led Congress, and what the people can do to change the composition of Congress so that the president could be impeached, if that is what the people want (vote to change the political composition of Congress). As Professor Lichtman concludes: "Justice will be realized ... not through revolution, but by the Constitution's peaceful remedy of impeachment -- but only if the people demand it."
The quotes from the book:
"Trump has broken all the usual rules of politics and governing. Early in his term, he has stretched presidential authority nearly to the breaking point, appointed cabinet officials dedicated to destroying the institutions they are assigned to run, and pushed America toward legal and constitutional crises. ... No previous president has entered the Oval Office without a shred of public service or with as egregious a record of enriching himself at the expense of others."
"With his humble roots and his penchant for spouting populism but privileging the rich, [Andrew] Johnson foreshadowed Trump. ... Don't be fooled by the shifting decisions, policies, and pronouncements of a fast-moving presidency."
"[Both Nixon and Trump]...exploited the resentments of white working class Americans and split the world into enemies and loyalists. In the first month of his presidency Trump talked more about "enemies" than any other president in history. Neither man allowed the law, the truth, the free press, or the potential for collateral damage to others to impede their personal agendas."
"The Nixon Administration has developed a new language," commented Time magazine, "a kind of Nix-speak." ... Surrogates would later find themselves caught in the same trap of struggling to explain away Trump-speak, often in the form of Trump-tweets. ... As President, Nixon's loathing of any independent check on his presidency led to a deep-seated animosity toward the media. ... Since his early days in business, Trump has elevated himself again and again above the laws that govern others."
"As a private citizen, Donald Trump has escaped serious retribution for his crimes and transgressions. ... It was clear to everyone except Trump that he had flagrantly broken the law [when he violated the Fair Housing Act]. ...[Department of] Justice officials concluded that "an underlying pattern of discrimination continues to exit in the Trump management organization."
"By operating unregistered, the Trump Foundation avoided required audits that would likely have disclosed the many ways in which Trump has exploited the foundation for illegal self-dealing. ...In drawing upon foundation funds solicited from others to settle personal and business debts, Trump has, in effect, laundered tax-free donations for his own gain. ... Trump has further flouted the law by diverting taxable personal and business income to the tax-free foundation. ... In October of 2016, the New York attorney general ordered the foundation to cease soliciting donations, which it did shortly thereafter."
"State officials in New Jersey and New York repeatedly fined his enterprises in amounts ranging from tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. ... When Trump's Atlantic City casinos collapsed, in typical fashion he passed the buck, blaming the economy."
"Like the Trump Foundation, Trump University was illegal from its inception... ... The allegations against Trump's bogus "university" were serious enough to justify a federal class-action lawsuit, charging that Trump violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), an act usually directed against organized crime."
"In his everlasting quest for an edge in business, Trump exploited undocumented immigrant workers, men and women who dared not protest low wages or dreadful working conditions out of fear of arrest and deportation. ... ...Trump's....models lived in small dormitories. ... [Models were] ...charged ... as much as $1,600 a month for a room ... shared with five other girls. ...Canadian-born fashion model Rachel Blais... ...said that Trump's company docked her not just for rent, but also for trainers, beauty treatments, travel, administrative costs, and eventually the cost of her work visa itself. ...despite making tens of thousands of dollars for the company during her three years of employment, she netted precisely $8,427.35. "Honestly, [Blais said] they are the most crooked agency I've ever worked for, and I've worked for quite a few. It is like modern day slavery."
"...Trump has ... failed to follow the practice of past presidents and divest himself from his many private business interests. "Foreign influence," Alexander Hamilton said, "is truly the Grecian horse to a republic."
"[Philippine] President Duterte has appointed Jose E.B. Antonio, the head of Century Properties Group, which owns the Trump Tower, as special Envoy to the United States. This means that Trump's profits depend on the good faith of Duterte's agent in the United States."
"Any economic benefit from a foreign government triggers a constitutional violation, punishable by impeachment. ... ...foreign governments may also decide to patronize Trump properties not for their fair market value, but to curry favor with the president."
"Portending another potential constitutional clash, Trump businesses are laden with debts that give lenders leverage over his presidency."
"Trump's business interests, not just foreign but also domestic, could subject him to a violation of two federal laws. The Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge ("STOCK") Act mirrors the laws prohibiting securities trading on inside information... Contrary to the assertion of the Trump team, STOCK Act prohibitions do apply to the president of the United States."
"Melania seems to have signaled her intention to profit as First Lady through the many lucrative product lines... ... A president's family should not be profiting from his public office... ... Texas A&M law professor Milan Markovic says trump is likely in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 227, because he "is not allowed to misuse his authority to put pressure on private companies or influence who they hire or do business with."
"There is a way to avoid trouble in this area, but Trump has resisted it, thereby turning his conflicts of interest into one of the easiest grounds for impeachment. ... Trump retains all ownership and licensing rights to his enterprises, which means he will continue to personally profit from all existing businesses. ... Any subordination of America's national interests to Trump's financial interests should suffice [to trigger impeachment]."
"...Trump may not even know anymore whether he is lying or not, but just thinks that whatever he believes at the moment must be true. ... Trump conjured up this outlandish percentage [of 42 percent unemployment under Obama] by counting as "unemployed" most or all the approximately 85 million Americans of working age who aren't working because they are students, homemakers, retirees, or persons too disabled to work. ... ...Trump is an outlier... his lying far exceeds the normal tendency of politicians to stretch and sometimes even break the truth."
This is a well-written, easy-to read book, which contains about ten or so editorial errors of various sorts - giving the impression that it may have been rushed to press. However, it's easy to figure out how sentences, words, etc. should have appeared so none of the snafus detract from comprehending the text. It is an engrossing book that even can be described as a page-turner, considering the current polarization in public opinion. Obviously, those who are disheartened by the election of Donald J. Trump as president, and that would be at least 2/3 of the population, will find the book a balm, and will be happy to read Lichtman's discussion of Trump's impeachable transgressions. The book thus has potentially a huge audience of eager readers, perhaps seeking solace in a dark political time. For someone who can devote several hours to reading it, the book could probably be read in a day or two. Since I can only read books in a piecemeal fashion, it took me about 4 days to read the 237 page book (not counting the footnotes). "The Case for Impeachment" would certainly constitute a page-turner for a "political junkie" or even anyone following news of the presidency today. I found this book mostly interesting, although once or twice it seemed boring - but that was only briefly. It's definitely not a slog. The author has a restrained style that is not overly "scholarly" and also inserts some judicious wit here and there. Most readers will enjoy this book - especially those who are unhappy with the results of the 2016 general election.
Professor Lichtman starts out by discussing what is impeachment, and how the wording pertaining to impeachment in the Constitution may be interpreted, as well as how the wording was arrived at, and what the significance of having rather general/vague wording means: A presidential impeachment can result from a great variety of things, not necessarily deriving from official malfeasance, criminal action such as bribery, or even political actions (as the Lewinsky scandal demonstrated). Also, grounds for impeachment are not time-limited: A president can be impeached for past wrong doing, even if, in a regular court of law, the statute of limitations for the wrong doing has expired.
The author describes in detail exactly what is the process of impeachment (of Federal officials including president). He describes how the process unfolds: Anyone, including an ordinary citizen, can request an impeachment but articles of impeachment usually originate in a House committee, and once they are voted on by the House and pass by a simple majority, then the president is impeached. An impeachment vote is similar to an indictment - it means the House has accepted the proposition that wrong-doing may have occurred, and that a trial in the Senate is warranted, to either convict or acquit the defendant (president). The impeachment verdict cannot be appealed.
Here is the wikipedia summation of how a Senate trial proceeds: "The proceedings unfold in the form of a trial, with each side having the right to call witnesses and perform cross-examinations. The House members, who are given the collective title of managers during the course of the trial, present the prosecution case, and the impeached official has the right to mount a defense with his own attorneys as well. Senators must also take an oath or affirmation that they will perform their duties honestly and with due diligence. After hearing the charges, the Senate usually deliberates in private. The U.S. Constitution requires a two-thirds majority for conviction.
The Senate enters judgment on its decision, whether that be to convict or acquit, and a copy of the judgment is filed with the Secretary of State.[4] Upon conviction in the Senate, the official is automatically removed from office and may also be barred from holding future office.[5] The removed official is also liable to criminal prosecution. The President may not grant a pardon in the impeachment case, but may in any resulting criminal case." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeach...
Obviously, this is a unique sort of proceeding, since we do not have a jury (the Senate) that does not know the defendant ahead of time, and although its deliberations are secret, as in a regular trial, it isn't clear if the vote cast by each Senator is made public, or simply the result of a secret Senate vote.
Professor Lichtman notes that an impeachment process is unique in that it is designed for one purpose only - separating an individual from their federal office. It is not a criminal or civil trial. The trial is presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and to repeat the verdict cannot be appealed. Lichtman says the trial is political in nature, that is, if the behavior or crimes or corruption etc. of a defendant have become so onerous as to be intolerable, impeachment provides an orderly way to remove the individual from office, unless the prospect of impeachment causes the person to quit first to avoid the embarrassment of a Senate trial. Once the person is impeached they lose their immunity, and can then also be prosecuted for criminal activity as called for in a regular a court of law, like any other citizen, with all due legal protections including appeals that any other defendant enjoys. Lichtman notes that in a Senate trial, the Senate acts as judge and jury, and that the Chief Justice's role is more that of a facilitator formally presiding over the process, he does not exactly run the proceedings as in a regular court case.
Lichtman also discusses the alternative method for removing presidents from the office of the presidency by means of invoking the 25th Amendment, which can temporarily replace the president by the vice-president as acting president if the president is considered disabled by the cabinet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-...
This process is described as byzantine in that the president doesn't have to agree to the recommendation for removal, and if the president continues to petition for reinstatement, that is submit a declaration, and Congress continues to vote against the president, the back and forth petitioning/voting could in theory continue indefinitely that is, as long as the now removed president would have served as president.
Here is the wikipedia summary for the Sections 3 and 4 of the 25th Amendment:
"Section 3 provides that when the President transmits a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, stating that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the Presidency, and until the President sends another written declaration to the aforementioned officers declaring himself able to resume discharging those powers and duties, the Vice President discharges those powers and duties as Acting President.
Section 4 is the only part of the amendment that has never been invoked.[25] It allows the Vice President, together with a "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide", to declare the President "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" by submitting a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. As with Section 3, the Vice President would become Acting President.
Section 4 is meant to be invoked should the President's incapacitation prevent him from discharging his duties, but he is unable or unwilling to provide the written declaration called for by Section 3. The President may resume exercising the Presidential duties by sending a written declaration to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House.
Should the Vice President and Cabinet believe the President is still "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office", they may within four days of the President's declaration submit another declaration that the President is incapacitated. If not already in session, the Congress must then assemble within 48 hours. The Congress has 21 days to decide the issue. If within the 21 days two-thirds of each house of Congress vote that the President is incapacitated, the Vice President would "continue" to be Acting President. Should the Congress resolve the issue in favor of the President, or make no decision within the 21 days allotted, then the President would "resume" discharging the powers and duties of his office. The use of the words "continue" and "resume" imply that the Vice President remains Acting President while Congress deliberates.
However, the President may again submit a written declaration of recovery to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House. That declaration could be responded to by the Vice President and the Cabinet in the same way as stated earlier. The specified 21-day Congressional procedure would start again."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-...
Historical background is provided, as to why impeachment was included in the Constitution to provide for the removal of presidents or federal judges, especially why the Founders considered the provision of an impeachment process in the Constitution crucial to the establishment of a democracy, given the experience of prior European hereditary/arbitrary governments/monarchies.
Specific instances of impeachment are discussed: The impeachment of President Andrew Johnson is examined in some detail. Interestingly, although Johnson had a disastrous presidency, and was impeached by the House, the author suggests that he may not have been convicted by the Senate because the vice-president he had selected upon ascending to the presidency, was considered worse (flightier etc).
Richard Nixon quit the presidency once he was informed he would be impeached, and Clinton's impeachment for perjury by the House and acquittal by the Senate is also discussed. There is also a discussion of an impeachment of a federal judge, where the judge was convicted and removed from office because of intemperate language, drunkenness etc.
The general discussion about impeachment though only comprises the beginning of the book. Most of the book is taken up by chapters examining a number of different reasons why Donald J. Trump may be impeached. This is really the heart of the volume, and as with other recent books I have read pertaining to politics, I shall include a number of quotes that I thought were worth noting.
The penultimate chapter is a refreshingly honest direct appeal by the author to President Trump as to how the President could change his ways now to avoid impeachment. It is realistic, forthright, but given the scale of improprieties listed in the preceding chapters of the volume, one wonders even if Trump immediately reformed himself, it would make any difference with respect to his problems. I still thought it was excellent for Lichtman to have included this direct appeal to President Trump - it also dispels any suggestion that the book is a "hatchet job" or biased, because Lichtman is giving excellent advice to Trump as to how he might avoid removal from office. One piece of advice, firing Steve Bannon, meanwhile did occur - 4 months after the book was published. Maybe Trump read the book and heeded Professor Lichtman's advice, at least insofar as the divisive/polarizing Bannon is concerned. (One can hope.) Unfortunately, though, there are too many other instances since the book appeared, wherein Trump continues true to (horrible) form, with gratuitous, immature, and destabilizing tweets, or inappropriate ad lib remarks, dog whistle comments, or even completely inappropriate speeches, such as the war mongering, threatening speech Trump gave at the United Nations on 9/17/17 http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/19/politic...
The book though ends on a hopeful note - discussing the chances of impeachment in a Republican led Congress, and what the people can do to change the composition of Congress so that the president could be impeached, if that is what the people want (vote to change the political composition of Congress). As Professor Lichtman concludes: "Justice will be realized ... not through revolution, but by the Constitution's peaceful remedy of impeachment -- but only if the people demand it."
The quotes from the book:
"Trump has broken all the usual rules of politics and governing. Early in his term, he has stretched presidential authority nearly to the breaking point, appointed cabinet officials dedicated to destroying the institutions they are assigned to run, and pushed America toward legal and constitutional crises. ... No previous president has entered the Oval Office without a shred of public service or with as egregious a record of enriching himself at the expense of others."
"With his humble roots and his penchant for spouting populism but privileging the rich, [Andrew] Johnson foreshadowed Trump. ... Don't be fooled by the shifting decisions, policies, and pronouncements of a fast-moving presidency."
"[Both Nixon and Trump]...exploited the resentments of white working class Americans and split the world into enemies and loyalists. In the first month of his presidency Trump talked more about "enemies" than any other president in history. Neither man allowed the law, the truth, the free press, or the potential for collateral damage to others to impede their personal agendas."
"The Nixon Administration has developed a new language," commented Time magazine, "a kind of Nix-speak." ... Surrogates would later find themselves caught in the same trap of struggling to explain away Trump-speak, often in the form of Trump-tweets. ... As President, Nixon's loathing of any independent check on his presidency led to a deep-seated animosity toward the media. ... Since his early days in business, Trump has elevated himself again and again above the laws that govern others."
"As a private citizen, Donald Trump has escaped serious retribution for his crimes and transgressions. ... It was clear to everyone except Trump that he had flagrantly broken the law [when he violated the Fair Housing Act]. ...[Department of] Justice officials concluded that "an underlying pattern of discrimination continues to exit in the Trump management organization."
"By operating unregistered, the Trump Foundation avoided required audits that would likely have disclosed the many ways in which Trump has exploited the foundation for illegal self-dealing. ...In drawing upon foundation funds solicited from others to settle personal and business debts, Trump has, in effect, laundered tax-free donations for his own gain. ... Trump has further flouted the law by diverting taxable personal and business income to the tax-free foundation. ... In October of 2016, the New York attorney general ordered the foundation to cease soliciting donations, which it did shortly thereafter."
"State officials in New Jersey and New York repeatedly fined his enterprises in amounts ranging from tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. ... When Trump's Atlantic City casinos collapsed, in typical fashion he passed the buck, blaming the economy."
"Like the Trump Foundation, Trump University was illegal from its inception... ... The allegations against Trump's bogus "university" were serious enough to justify a federal class-action lawsuit, charging that Trump violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), an act usually directed against organized crime."
"In his everlasting quest for an edge in business, Trump exploited undocumented immigrant workers, men and women who dared not protest low wages or dreadful working conditions out of fear of arrest and deportation. ... ...Trump's....models lived in small dormitories. ... [Models were] ...charged ... as much as $1,600 a month for a room ... shared with five other girls. ...Canadian-born fashion model Rachel Blais... ...said that Trump's company docked her not just for rent, but also for trainers, beauty treatments, travel, administrative costs, and eventually the cost of her work visa itself. ...despite making tens of thousands of dollars for the company during her three years of employment, she netted precisely $8,427.35. "Honestly, [Blais said] they are the most crooked agency I've ever worked for, and I've worked for quite a few. It is like modern day slavery."
"...Trump has ... failed to follow the practice of past presidents and divest himself from his many private business interests. "Foreign influence," Alexander Hamilton said, "is truly the Grecian horse to a republic."
"[Philippine] President Duterte has appointed Jose E.B. Antonio, the head of Century Properties Group, which owns the Trump Tower, as special Envoy to the United States. This means that Trump's profits depend on the good faith of Duterte's agent in the United States."
"Any economic benefit from a foreign government triggers a constitutional violation, punishable by impeachment. ... ...foreign governments may also decide to patronize Trump properties not for their fair market value, but to curry favor with the president."
"Portending another potential constitutional clash, Trump businesses are laden with debts that give lenders leverage over his presidency."
"Trump's business interests, not just foreign but also domestic, could subject him to a violation of two federal laws. The Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge ("STOCK") Act mirrors the laws prohibiting securities trading on inside information... Contrary to the assertion of the Trump team, STOCK Act prohibitions do apply to the president of the United States."
"Melania seems to have signaled her intention to profit as First Lady through the many lucrative product lines... ... A president's family should not be profiting from his public office... ... Texas A&M law professor Milan Markovic says trump is likely in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 227, because he "is not allowed to misuse his authority to put pressure on private companies or influence who they hire or do business with."
"There is a way to avoid trouble in this area, but Trump has resisted it, thereby turning his conflicts of interest into one of the easiest grounds for impeachment. ... Trump retains all ownership and licensing rights to his enterprises, which means he will continue to personally profit from all existing businesses. ... Any subordination of America's national interests to Trump's financial interests should suffice [to trigger impeachment]."
"...Trump may not even know anymore whether he is lying or not, but just thinks that whatever he believes at the moment must be true. ... Trump conjured up this outlandish percentage [of 42 percent unemployment under Obama] by counting as "unemployed" most or all the approximately 85 million Americans of working age who aren't working because they are students, homemakers, retirees, or persons too disabled to work. ... ...Trump is an outlier... his lying far exceeds the normal tendency of politicians to stretch and sometimes even break the truth."
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Case for Impeachment.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
September 16, 2017
–
Started Reading
September 20, 2017
– Shelved
September 20, 2017
–
Finished Reading
March 13, 2018
– Shelved as:
impeachment
Comments Showing 1-17 of 17 (17 new)
date
newest »
newest »
"In 1999, when Trump first contemplated running for the presidency, Marla almost lost he remainder of her divorce settlement by saying, "I will feel it is my duty to tell the American people what he is really like. But I can't imagine that hey would really elect him, would they? His drug is attention." ... Trump vehemently denied every single one of his dozen [sexual harassment] accusers' charges. ... The day after Trump's inauguration, in the largest single day of protest in American history, more than three million women and male backers across America and the world demonstrated against his mistreatment of women and anti-woman policies.""Humanity's survival is likely a stake with catastrophic climate change. ... On December 6, 2009, on the eve of UN Climate Talks in Copenhagen, a coalition of business leaders openly wrote to President Barack Obama: ... Investing in a Clean Energy Economy will drive state-of-the-art technologies that will spur economic growth, create new energy jobs, and increase our energy security, all the while reducing the harmful emissions that are putting our planet at risk." Signatories to that letter, which ran as an ad in the New York Times, included Donald J. Trump, Chairman and President, Donald J. Trump Jr., EVP, Eric F. Trump, EVP, Ivanka M. Trump, EVP, The Trump Organization. ...Trump knew he could not win the Republican nomination unless he changed gears on climate change. ... ...Congress impeached and nearly convicted President Johnson for what was essentially a policy dispute over Reconstruction. ... The debate over human-induced climate change as Trump recognized in 2009 is political, not scientific. ... The study of scientific papers found that the doubters have diminished over time, becoming "a vanishingly small proportion of the published research."
"To slow climate change we need to get off fossil fuels and switch to clean, renewable sources of energy. ... The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates greenhouse gases under the clean Air Act's 2009 endangerment finding, which determined that CO2 and other greenhouse gases pose a threat to human health. ... The Department of Defense... ...warned in a 2015 report that "climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources such as food and water. These impacts are already occurring, and the scope, scale, and intensity of these impacts are projected to increase over time." ... Former Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, now Trump's EPA administrator, is a fossil fuel advocate and climate change denier, who is best known for his efforts to weaken or outright destroy the agency he now heads. ... As early as 1977, an internal memo revealed that Exxon's own scientists and mangers knew that carbon dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel use contribute to global arming and would eventually endanger humanity, but Exxon concealed this information for decades including during Tillerson's tenure as CEO. Tillerson publicly claims that he and ExxonMobil believe in anthropogenic climate change and support a carbon tax. But under his watch the company has lavishly financed denier groups and politicians. His company has pursued oil and gas deals across the globe and among fossil-fuel corporations is a laggard in exploring the transition to clean and renewable sources of energy. ... An analysis by Climate Central, an independent organization of climate scientists and journalists reporting on climate change, explains the implications of a failure to continue U.S. efforts to combat climate change: "Climate scientists have been outspoken about what Trump's 'brighter future' might look like if climate change is ignored and carbon emissions are not cut: Weather will become more extreme, heat waves will become more common, Earth's polar ice caps will melt and America's coastal cities could be underwater within the lifetimes of today's youngest children." ...climate change advances the spread of topical diseases into new climes, and ... it reduces and contaminates our supply of drinkable water. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that the mosquito that carries the Zika virus, which causes horrible birth defects, is already in the United States. Other diseases that could become much more widespread if climate change is unchecked include cholera, malaria, and Lyme disease." ... A study by the Center for American Progress found that 59 percent of House Republicans were climate change deniers.""...the lack of honesty and disclosure by Trump and his team raises the suspicion that they have much to hide when it comes to their Russian connections. ... Regardless of the outcome of ongoing investigation, with a big assist from Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin has already achieved his primary aim of disrupting American democracy and the solidarity of the free world. He has cast doubt on the legitimacy of America's presidential election and provoked Americans into questioning their nation's democratic practices and its free press. He has weakened the common values and alliances that have sustained and protected freedom across the world since World War II."
"Foreign policy expert Molly K. McKew, whose yeas as an adviser to Mikheil Saakashvili, the former president of Georgia, offered her deep insight in to Putin's Russia, says that Putin aims to create "an unstable new world order of 'all against all' " and to "to replace Western-style democratic regimes with illiberal, populist, or nationalist ones." After nearly bankrupting his own country while amassing corrupt riches in the billions for himself, Putin has no choice but to remake the world outside Russia in his own image." "...[on] July 27, 2016...Donald Trump said, "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 3,000 emails that are missing ...They probably have them. I'd like to have them released." ...Trump repeatedly praised Putin during the campaign, calling him a leader "far more" than Barack Obama... ...Trump's pandering to Putin isn't new. In 2013, when Trump held the Miss Universe pageant, which he co-owned, in Moscow, he tweeted, "Do you think Putin will be going the The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow--if so, will he become my new best friend?" ...Trump did not meet with Putin in Moscow...but he did meet with Russian oligarchs who had close ties to Putin, including Herman Gref,the chief executive officer to state-controlled Sberbank PJSC, Russia's largest bank. ... Trump has tried to launch real estate ventures in Russia through the Bayrock Group, a shady Russian-connected outfit and Trump's partner on at least four proposed American projects, the Fort Lauderdale Trump Tower, the Trump Ocean Club in Fort Lauderdale, the SoHo condominium-hotel in New York, and a resort in Phoenix. ...Trump testified [in a 2007 deposition] that Bayrock was working with contacts in Russia and Eastern Europe to complete Trump/Bayrock deals in Russia, Ukraine, and Poland. ...The only Russians who likely had the resources and political connections to sponsor such ambitious international ventures were he corrupt "oligarchs" allied with President Vladimir Putin. ...In 2015, New York State filed a massive tax evasion, money laundering, and racketeering civil case against Bayrock, Sater, Arif, and another Bayrock principal, Julius Schwarz. ... Trump was not among the accused, but he state cited his joint Bayrock ventures as one avenue for laundering money and evading taxes. The state, through the private complaint, alleges, that, although "Bayrock does conduct legitimate real estate business, but for most of its existence it was substantially and covertly mob-owned and operated. Arif, Satter and Schwarz operated it for years through a pattern of continuous, related crimes, including mail, wire, and bank fraud; tax evasion; money laundering; conspiracy; bribery; extortion; and embezzlement." It cited as a "Concrete example of their crime," the Trump SoHo property in New York. ... Although the sources of Bayrock's financing are mysterious they were likely getting money from the Russian-affiliated nation of Kazakhstan and possibly Russia."
"A 2007 Bayrock investor presentation cites the Kazakh oligarch Alexander Machkevitch's "Eurasia Group" as one of its partners for Bayrock's equity financing. One of Trump's first, post-election conversations with foreign leaders was a congratulatory call to the authoritarian president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, a backer of Putin's imperial ambitions. ... In 2014, an investment group that [Trump's secretary of Commerce Wilbur] Ross heads took a controlling share in the Bank of Cyprus. ... "Cyprus banks have a long and painful history of laundering dirty money from Russians involved with corruption and criminality, "said Elise Bean, an authority on money laundering. ... Russian oligarchs have major stakes in the bank... Another stakeholder is Dmitry Rybolovlev. In 2008, during the real estate bust, Donald Trump sold his Palm Beach mansion to Rybolovlev for some $95 to $100 million. Four years earlier, during the real estate boom, Trump had bought the property for just over $41 million. ... Although the Senate confirmed Ross for Commerce Secretary, the White House has refused to release his written answers to questions about his ties to he bank of Cyprus and Russian oligarchs.""Trump's... ... ...one-time campaign manager, political consultant Paul Manafort... ... ...was the master strategist behind Yanukovych's election as president and worked to restore his pro-Russian Party of Regions to power after Yanukovych fled to Russia. ... An investigation by the New York Times uncovered hand-written ledgers that include 22 notations of undisclosed cash payments to Manafort from Yanukovych's party totaling $12.7 million. ... Carter Page, who Trump identified as an adviser on foreign policy, worked in Russia for several years for Merrill Lynch and had investments there. An opponent of U.S. sanction against Russia, Page spoke at the New Economic School's commencement ceremony in Moscow. Blasting the "hypocrisy" of America's foreign policy, he said to the Russians, "Washington and other Western powers have impeded potential progress through their often-hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization, inequality , corruption and regime change." Roger Stone a long-time Trump ally and adviser, said during the campaign that he was in contact with Julian Assange of Wikileaks. "I do have a back-channel communication with Assange," he said, "because we have a good mutual friend."
"...[on] January 6, 2017, ... the U.S. intelligence agencies released a second and more comprehensive report concluding at the direction of President Putin Russia had meddled in the American presidential election with the express purpose of aiding in the election of Donald Trump. ... Russian manipulation included not only stolen emails, but the propagation of false news stories and the use of state-controlled media to undermine Clinton. ... During the campaign, from October through the election, mentioned Wikileaks, the outlet for Russian-hacked Democratic emails, 164 items; that's an average of five references per day. He enthused "We love Wikileaks," and said that Wikileaks proves that Clinton should not "be able to run for president."
"Steele's dossier... ... ...claimed that Trump had struck a deal with Putin, agreeing to adopt pro-Russian policies in return for Russian assistance in winning the election. ... Steele charged that "there was a well-developed conspiracy of cooperation between them [the Trump campaign] and Russian leadership," led on the Trump side primarily by Manafort, Page, and others. ... In an especially scandalous quid pro quo, Igor Sechin, the head of the Russian oil giant Rosneft, is purported by Steele to have offered Trump via his then adviser Carter Page, "the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatized) stake in Rosneft" in return for lifting the sanctions against Russia. ... A Trump insider... ...alleges that "The reason for using Wikileaks" to release hacked Clinton emails "was 'plausible deniability' and the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge of Trump and senior members of his campaign team." ... On July 22, 2016, the day after the Republican convention, WikiLeaks released its first trove of Hacked Democratic Party emails, nearly 20,000 in all.""...General Michael Flynn, Trump's National Security Advisor... ...resigned in disgrace after just three weeks on the job, because he had lied about discussing Russian sanctions on a telephone call with ambassador Kislyak during the transition. ... Flynn and Kislyak were recorded discussing the sanctions imposed by the Obama administration for Russian meddling n the election. ... ...Trump had once been the anonymous leaker-in-chief to the New York media [and]...had reveled in the illegal leaks of hacked Clinton emails during the campaign."
"...I predict that he will continue to operate as a rogue president, basing the case for impeachment on the Nixon model of abused power. ... The president has already sounded an alarm bell for the world, and he cannot unsound it with a more carefully drafted and executed travel ban."
"One the one-week anniversary of his inauguration, Trump issued an executive order that banned, for ninety days, immigration from seven Muslim-majority nations: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. ... With one stroke of the pen, Donald Trump dimmed America's bacon of freedom, prompting cries of anguish from allies, and censure from independent voices and both Republicans and Democrats at home. ... Trump's travel ban fed into terrorist propaganda that American has declared a religious war against Islam. ... It has entrapped, for example, Iraqis who risk their lives by working with the American military as interpreters or informants and who were promised safe haven in America. ... The Iraqi parliament voted symbolically to impose a reciprocal ban on American travelers to Iraq.""The commemorative statement that his administration issued [in observance of Holocaust Remembrance Day] deliberately omitted explicit mention of he slaughter of Jews. ...Trump's statement shows his seeming blindness to lessons of the Holocaust as a 'Jewish story" and their relevance for the formulation of immigration and refugee policy today. ... Immigration from the seven covered nations is not national emergency nor even a serious threat of any kind to the United States. ... ...the way to prevent domestic terrorism is to work with the U.S. Muslim community to prevent radicalization, not to alienate and antagonize American Muslims. ... This order made some 11 million American residents vulnerable to deportation, their fates dependent on the discretion of enforcement officers whose ranks Trump wants to expand by some fifteen thousand.
"Trump and Bannon have, effectively, turned back the clock to discredited policies of the xenophobic 1920s, when nativists battled against pluralistic, cosmopolitan forces that hey believed threatened America's national identity. ... On the day [Rumana Ahmed, an American-born Muslim woman and a professional National Security Council staffer who chose to stay on and work with the Trump team] .... resigned, she told Trump's senior NSC communications adviser, Michael Anton, of her consternation with what she saw as the administration's anti-Muslim policies.""...Judge Brinkema found that the ban likely violates the First Amendment's prohibition against "an establishment of religion," which prohibits any government action that favors one religion over another. ... ...the Ninth Circuit rejected such absolute presidential power, ruling that "There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy."
"...Trump has disregarded federal law and American traditions carved out to preserve a safe space for principled dissent. ... Trump also fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, a Justice Department career lawyer for twenty-seven yeas, when she refused to defend his travel ban in court. ... Nixon's former White House counsel John Dean said that Trump had exceeded even Nixon with this invective. "I've never read a White House statement as nasty as Trump's attack on acting AG Sally Yates -- a new low."
"In drafting his order, Trump did not consult with the congressional leadership or chairs or members of the pertinent committees. ... In a ... serious violation of checks and balances, Trump and his advisers responded by waging war against the judiciary. ,,, Trump's disparagement of the judiciary raises concern that, in the event of another terrorist incident, which is almost inevitable, Trump will blame the courts and his political enemies as a pretext for taking charge under martial law."
"To eliminate another check on his powers, Trump has taken to discrediting any reporting that does not follow his propaganda line, condemning ti as "fake news" by the "very dishonest press." "The administration ... released a list of alleged, uncovered terrorist atrocities. It included attacks in Parks; Nice, France; Orlando, Florida; and San Bernardino, California, that the media blanketly covered for days. Trump projects onto the press his own inveterate lying when he scoffs that what they report is "fake news."
"Trump has also exceeded Nixon by adopting Putin-style censorship of the media. On February 24, 2017, the White House barred from a press briefing selected outlets that it had castigated for reporting news critical of the administration, including CNN, Politico, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times. ... By discrediting the press, or at least the press he doesn't like, and stifling internal dissent, Trump ensures that he becomes the only source of information, however false, for the public. ... He is following his own history of largely unchecked behavior over nearly five decades in business and politics, with gag orders, shaming of critics, lawsuits, and threats of lawsuits.""Chaos at this extreme level fits with the objectives of Trump's chief strategist, Steve Bannon, who has called for the "deconstruction of the administrative state." ... If "the system is totally broken," as Trump has said, he "alone can fix it." In multi-ethnic countries run by autocratic leaders, conditions conducive to concentrating power in one group's hand are often created by making one ethnic minority the target of dehumanization and fear-mongering. ... ...Trump has made immigrants into the surrogate for an ethnic minority. ... Like authoritarians across the world, he has also fallen back on projecting abuses on others. ...Never before... has a sitting president abused the bully pulpit of his office to claim that a predecessor committed a serious and at the time impeachable crime."
"Although not a formal branch of government, the press is a necessary pillar of American democracy. ...Republican senator John McCain of Arizona said that the suppression of the free press is "how dictators get started,"and "if you want to preserve democracy as we know it, you have to have a free -- and many times adversarial -- press."
"[Former president George W. Bush} ...concluded, "It's kind of hard to, you know, tell others to have an independent free press when we're not willing to have one ourselves. " "The Trump campaign is not abut any cause, it is all about Trump. His campaign is all about him. How he treats other people is all about him -- whether one is praised and patted on the head or cruelly mocked depends on what you have said about him." - Peter Wehner, Conservative political Analyst, June 2, 2016.
"Trump may have claimed a landslide victory, but in truth, he lacks the protection of a wide popular mandate; post-election exit pols found that only 34 percent of voters believed that Trump had the right personality and temperament for the office of president. ... Politics attracts narcissistic personalities, but Trump breaks the mold, topping even his notoriously self-absorbed trio of campaign surrogates: Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, and Chris Christie. ... Some extreme narcissists may verge on delusional in their lack of introspection or consideration related to the damage they wreak on others. ... ...what professionals know about extreme narcissism: that it typically results from deep-seated insecurity and in some cases shaming or neglect by a parent figure. ... A "narcissistic injury" is a term describing these small or perceived slight that inspire rage in the narcissist and a desire for outsized punishment or revenge. These perceived injuries pierce the narcissist's thin skin, exposing his inner sense of smallness, which must be denied and protected at all costs. In his 2007 book "Think Big and Kick Ass in Business and Life" Trump said, "When someone crosses you, my advice is get even. When people wrong you, go after those people because it is a good feeling and because other people will see you doing it. I love getting even." ... Even the validation of wining the presidency did not stop the insecure Trump from lashing out against any slight, no matter how trivial, ho matter the source. ... In a reflection of his warped view that all African Americans live in hellholes of drugs and crime, he added that [John ] Lewis [the African American civil rights icon and Democratic representative of Atlanta] "should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested)."
"Republican strategist Nicolle Wallace, who served as communications director for President George W. Bush, said of Trump's behavior: "It is cyber-bullying. This is a strategy to bully somebody who dissents. That's what is dark and disturbing." Presidential historian Robert Dallek said that, "It's beneath the dignity of the office. He doesn't seem to understand that." "The timing of Trump's tweets, which often post overnight or early in the morning, further discloses the extent of his extreme narcissism. During the day, when he is distracted and surrounded by a self-selected admiring audience,he feels temporarily fulfilled. As night falls, and he is left to his own thoughts and subconscious insecurities, his mind ruminates on his "enemies' and those who have harmed him. He is unable to stifle the strong urge to retaliate or crush his "opponent." This intense emotional response is a characteristic phenomenon of the narcissistic injury and its toxic repercussions for the narcissistic personality. The final, frightening characteristic of extreme narcissism that Trump exhibits is delusional grandiosity, which for Trump manifests itself most visibly in bragging beyond reason or fact, even on matters that seem trivial. ... ...Republican senator Rand Paul of Kentucky said of Trump, "I think a little humility, a dose of humility might be good for him." ... In so many ways, Trump reveals his relentless need to protect his insecure sense of self. ... Trump's delusional grandiosity, his black-and-white vision of the world, and his hair-trigger outbursts are frightening in a man who controls a nuclear arsenal with the power to end civilization. ... If you were sitting in Beijing, Pyongyang, Moscow or Teheran, you might be frightened to hear the world's most powerful leader welcoming an arms race and also pledging to win wars, inflate his military, and cut diplomacy and foreign aid. ... An ill-considered Trump response to a crisis or a manufactured crisis that heedlessly brings us close to nuclear war could lead to impeachment. ... The roots of Trump's grandiosity extend far into his past."
"Another sign of Trump's grandiose narcissism is his infamous tendency to deflect onto others all problems, difficulties and failures. ... Trump's impulsivity, lack of insight, and poor judgment are dangerous for the country in multiple ways but may ultimately lead to his own undoing before leading to the country's. ""Issues surrounding Trump's temperament raise the question of whether he might be charged with "incapacity," one of the grounds for impeachment that James Madison cited n the Constitutional Convention. ...The House's fourth article of impeachment against [Judge] Pickering charged him with being a man of "loose morals and intemperate habits ...disgraceful to his own character as a judge and degrading to the honor of the United States." Tweak a few of the words and it's easy to see how similar charges could be leveled against President Trump today. "
"An open letter, signed by thirty-five psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers, most of them Ph.D.s or M.D.s, said that "We believe that the grave emotional instability indicated by Mr. Trump's speech and actions makes him incapable of serving safety as president. ... His words and behavior suggest a profound inability to empathize. Individuals with these traits distort reality to suit their psychological state, attacking facts and those who convey them."
The author's advice to Donald Trump: "Get rid of your private security force -- they smack too much of Mussolini's Black Shirts. ... In a democratic system, the courts a are a check on tyranny no mater how vexing they may be. ... [Steve Bannon] ...will be forever despised by the many Americans who loathed Breitbart News under his direction and who believe that he represents racism and Antisemitism in America."
"...as students of history, the framers knew that power corrupts and they established impeachment as a legal and peaceful means for escaping tyranny without having to resort to revolution or assassination."
"Once Trump becomes more of a liability than an asset to the GOP, the party may be willing to turn on him through impeachment. ... Priorities include tax cuts, deregulation of business, the gutting of environmental laws, repeal and replacement of the Affordable Are Act, and a reordering of spending allocations from domestic to military.""Americans rightly celebrate their nation's founders: Thomas Jefferson for justifying independence; Washington for leading the Continental army to victory in the American Revolution. But it was the protests of ordinary colonials, men and women, whites and blacks, that turned public sentiment against King George III and ignited the revolution. "The Revolution was," as John Adams wrote, "in the minds and hearts of he people."
Can't wait for the trials to start in September. One Dutch lawyer got 30 days already. Fascinating. What a time to be alive!There was a black professor that also predicted the win, based on the ol' forgotten angry white guy.
Yes, and another professor who used a method based on "keys" to predicting who wins the general election, and he was right again this time (had correctly predicted the outcome of several previous presidential elections). The next few months are a crapshoot, since DJT is in hot water, he may start flailing out to create more and more serious distractions from his legal problems. He could try to create a national emergency then that's the ideal excuse to impose a state of emergency and (conveniently enough for him) suspend the investigation and trial etc. Of course if he tries that, it'll certainly tear the country apart. It won't be pretty. The idea is to keep DJT reined in - pacified somehow - and ignore him otherwise. That's what the mainstream Republicans want, rather than have a competent right wing fanatic like Pence become POTUS.
I was surprised to see that Kelly is still in the WH - one of the last "adults" in the room. Once Kelly departs, no-one will be around to restrain DJT, other than Javanka. The many unfolding scandals haven't triggered Congressional investigations (other than the Russia election tampering inquiries) because the Republicans want a bill-signing automaton in the WH (that they thought they could control; exactly what German pol leadership thought about Hitler at first).
DJT wants to throw America's weight around and be a global bully. He wants to get better trade deals, and push countries around at will. This is his idea of "greatness." An aggressive foreign policy or protectionist trade policy will not improve the lot of the millions of misguided Republicans who voted for him - or Americans of any political persuasion who didn't vote for him. The fact that Republicans keep losing by-elections shows that voters are growing skeptical - the deregulation and gutting of various environmental regulations will poison the environment eventually and most Americans even the conservative ones, would rather not suffer from toxic emissions in the air or sludge in the drinking water. He followed a policy of economic stimulus with the tax cuts but the cuts are only permanent for the rich, temporary for everyone else. The only leg Trump has to stand on is the same one he stood on from day 1: Appeals to ethno-nationalism, and (unjust) denunciations of Mexicans and so forth. The hard core supporters will continue to support him no matter what because they want a time-out on immigration but the rest of the Trump "act" will erode his support among the non-rabid sort (already happening).
Thank you for this highly informative review!I am on my way to bed. So I could only glance over it. Plan to read it properly tomorrow and also read your following comments.
"Many of Trump's claims during the campaign were so absurd that they required no debunking. ... Trump said that he knows "more about ISIS than the generals," more about renewable energy "the any human being on Earth," and more about taxes than anyone, "maybe in the history of the world." ...Trump asserted, "We had a massive landslide victory, as you know, in the Electoral College." Trump lost the popular vote by a record number for a winning candidate, and his Electoral College margin of victory ranked 46th out of 58 presidential elections. ...If there are no facts, then Trump can project his own deceptions on others. ...Trump said that his inauguration crowd was so large that it "went all the way back to the Washington Monument." Aerial photos of the event show that it didn't come close. ...At a news conference in mi-February, Trump repeated a version of an earlier lie, bragging that he had scored "the biggest Electoral College win since Ronald Reagan." Yet five other candidates since Reagan garnered more Electoral College votes than Trump. George H.W. Bush in 1988, Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, and Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. When confronted with his lie, the shameless Trump deflected, "I was given that information." He said, "Actually, I've seen that information around," just as he had seen the information around that Obama was born in Kenya or that Muslims in New Jersey cheered the 9/11 attacks. ...Trump can't be shamed into telling the truth, because as his history of lying proves, Trump has no shame. ...the assassination of truth is no laughing matter. It recalls George Orwell's world of double think, where reality dissolves and the totalitarian Big Brother holds sway by telling deliberate lies that he simultaneously believes to be true. ...verbal contortions cost Bill Clinton his credibility and opened the door for his impeachment. ... Trump has been sued by businesses claiming that he failed to pay their bills, by individuals alleging fraud, personal injury, sexual harassment, or discrimination, and by government agencies."