The editors of the Chicago Tribune have lurched uncontrollably onto the position I proposed four months ago:
To put it bluntly, House Democrats are overreacting while Republicans are underreacting — pretending there’s nothing to criticize in Trump’s behavior.
So, given the cold reality that the Senate won’t vote to remove Trump, impeachment opens the way for him to claim victory.
Hence our call for censure. Without that, Trump walks.
and
This impeachment inquiry hasn’t persuaded us the president’s actions regarding Ukraine threatened the security and integrity of our republic. Impeachment requires a political rather than legal judgment, and in our view his overstep, while serious, didn’t meet the extraordinary standard required to seek to expel a president and thus overturn an election. Trump did pressure Zelenskiy and likely delayed aid. In doing so he didn’t jeopardize American governance or national security.
Hence our verdict: Trump does deserves censure — not the freedom to claim exoneration.
Unfortunately, a wholly partisan inquiry followed by partisan support for impeachment and bipartisan opposition to it have actually increased the likelihood that Trump will, indeed, claim vindication. The path towards a bipartisan agreement on censure was greatest before Nancy Pelosi announced her impeachment inquiry.
Two people opposing it is Bipartisan? One of those is turning Repubican. So 50% +1 is bad but 50% +2 is fine? This is tribal. No one who relies on votes from the conservative tribe will vote against Trump and no one who relies on votes from the liberal tribe will vote for him. What he did was wrong enough that it actually does merit impeachment, but it is a waste of time as you cant get the votes in our current system to vote out someone.
Steve
On this we agree. The follow-up question is why are they doing it? Because it’s the right thing to do suggests a lack of familiarity with Congress.
I agree with Steve the impeachment vote does appear to be more “tribal†than bipartisan, with only 2 democrat votes turning it into a bipartisan event. However, I vehemently disagree that the content of the Ukrainian phone met any criteria triggering justification for impeachment.
When you throw in the FISA lies, manipulation of documentation, omission of exculpatory information, along with the one-sided fiasco of the Democrat House impeachment hearings, the entire investigative protocols and process has been an end run around truth and/or justice.
Perhaps I should mention that when all is said and done I expect 5-10% of the caucus to vote against impeachment, abstain, have a kid’s dance recital to attend when the vote is taken, etc.
“The follow-up question is why are they doing it?”
Why did the GOP impeach CLinton for lying abobut sex, not even remotely a national security issue? First, you have some true believers that think you should impeach becasue it is the right thing to do even if you arent going to win. Second, it rallies (and appeases) your base. Not a tactic that appeals to me bbut that is the entire basis for what trump does so you cant say it doesnt work, I just dont think Democrats are going to fall into place like Republicans would. Remember Will Rogers.
Steve
I thought Clinton should have been censured rather than impeached. Perjury is a felony. It being about sex is not a mitigating factor. That’s still a felony. Clinton was also disbarred over it. Presumably, you think that was a purely partisan action as well?
Which felonies do you think are excusable if they’re about sex?
I think disbarment was appropriate for lying in an investigation. Lawyers shouldnt do that, or at least not get caught. If by excusable you mean shouldnt be kicked out of office I think that I would pretty much limit it to lying about consensual sex, but then I dont know why an investigator would ever be asking about that, and if they did why would they persecute? (Deliberate word choice)
Steve
“Why did the GOP impeach CLinton for lying abobut sex,..â€
The usual dishonesty we have all become accustomed to. He was impeached for committing the felony act of purgery in the Paula Jones case, a civil legal action, not Monica Lewinsky. That said, because impeachment is a political, not legal, action I have always said that fact provided an opening for perspective on proportionality. Impeaching was not required, just censure. The legal system could deal with his law license, which it did.
The current situation is reliant on venal motivations not grounded in law or fact. Only fools believe otherwise. The very tortured interpretation of the phone call requires mind reading and selective editing. Further, it can be summarized as “impeach the President for abuse of power, for inquiring if the former Vice President abused his power.†Farcical.
No sensible adult, only rabid partisans, can take this seriously. Just like Comeys bizarre interview with Chris Wallace. Worse than Prince Andrew?
The media is doing its best to flush the Horowitz findings down the toilet, with mixed success. Durham’s findings will be another thing altogether.
“venal motivations”
You can simply read that on Schiff’s face.
Clinton was accused of perjury in the Paula Jones case because during that case he was asked if he ever had sex with Lewinsky. He denied it.
“During the deposition in the Jones case, Clinton was asked, “Have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?” The judge ordered that Clinton be given an opportunity to review the definition. It said that “a person engages in sexual relations when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person”.[29][30][31] Clinton flatly denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky.[32] Later, at the Starr Grand Jury, Clinton stated that he believed the definition of sexual relations agreed upon for the Jones deposition excluded his receiving oral sex.
It was upon the basis of this statement that the perjury charges in his impeachment were drawn up.”
Steve
Embarrassing
Pedant much, steve? You are very desperate these days.
This is what is known as unraveling, steve. Comey is a stooge.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fisa-court-slams-fbi-rare-public-statement
@steve: Nixon was impeached for perjury, Walter Nixon.
So you say this. ” He was impeached for committing the felony act of purgery in the Paula Jones case, a civil legal action, not Monica Lewinsky”
When we look it up we find that the perjury was, wait for it, lying about sex with Lewinsky. Your response is an ad hominem, which is all you have left so guess I cant blame you.
PD- Yup, he committed perjury. He lied about using his influence to intervene in a drug trial. So while I was an officer, I was never an officer of the court like a lawyer would be. Is it common for courts to prosecute people for lying about consensual sex? Has it ever happened? Do you think that is a reasonable comparison to lying about trying to influence a drug trial?
Steve
Why are the Democrats so desperate to get Trump out of office? At worst they would just have to endure five more years of him, and with the House under their control they can use the power of the purse to constrain him.
They started planning for impeachment even before he was sworn in, and the result of the 2018 elections put the plan in higher gear. The Ukraine phone call for some reason put it in overdrive, IMO before they were ready. I think they wanted to spring impeachment sometime next spring or summer when it would be too late for the Republicans to nominate another man for POTUS. What was in that phone call that made the plan go into frantic mode? Crowdstrike? The DNC server? The replacement of Ambassador Y? Burisma? Biden? Giuliani? Barr? Energy independence? SOMETHING set someone off. Hopefully we’ll find out.
Why were Republicans so desperate to get Clinton out of office? They whipped up a fake investigation about a land deal that ended with them impeaching over lying about sex. In Trump’s case there was talk about impeachment early, just like there was with Obama. The difference is that Trump finally went and did something that is clealry impeachable. If you arent going to impeach a POTUS over using their powers to affect an election there isnt much you are going to impeach for.
Steve
They started planning for impeachment even before he was sworn in, and the result of the 2018 elections put the plan in higher gear. The Ukraine phone call for some reason put it in overdrive,
Trump was an outlier, that neither the establishment left nor right could influence and count on in supporting or implementing establishment type agendas. He truly disrupts the backers of consensus thinking, is unruly, thinks out of the box, is unpredictable and subject to change, throwing ideologically-formulated strategies of both friends and foes off balance and often not followed. Consequently, he is hated by most on the left, and many on the stuffy right.
It’s the “commoners” who feel a kinship and compatibility with Trump’s strong personal style and proactive presidency. They see a man watching their back, their livelihoods, and neighborhoods far more than other R or D presidents have, who have marketed lip service over delivering the goods promised. People attending his rallies also enthuse about the positive vibes radiating around “happy,” diverse people experiences — ones sharing similar values and goals rather than dividing themselves into disgruntled gender, class, and race identities.Â
Indeed, this is a strikingly different presidency where presidential protocols and norms have been reconfigured, and new ground has been broken on long term problems. In doing so, more good than harm has been achieved in this country - an outcome that has positively steamed the MSM and Democrat party opposition . The big dilemma emerging has been how do you get rid of such an iconoclastic, controversial but successful figure? And, this has been the main thrust of the Democrats, especially since they took over the house in the 2018 election. Hence they have introduced a series of investigative escapades, involving Russian collusion, obstruction, the man is “crazy,” emolument dereliction, constant besmirching of his character/tweets/language, on and on until the deployment of the exploited Ukraine phone, giving them one final opportunity to pull off a dehabilitating impeachment before the 2020 election.
” The big dilemma emerging has been how do you get rid of such an iconoclastic, controversial but successful figure? ”
You should remember that only about 42% of the country thinks he is successful. Those who do think he is successful mostly reach that conclusion by citing Trump’s claims that he is successful, not anything objective.
What I will grant you is that he has successfully conned people into believing that he cares about them. There arent really any changes yet to demonstrate that. Jobs are growing at the same rate as under Obama, and just like under Obama the jobs arent that good. Nothing is being done about immigration. Health care has not been addresed. But, Trump knows how to keep his base happy. I would say that his success at this is unprecedented. No other POTUS has been so willing to cater to his base and not just ignore but actively attack the other half of the country, to the great delight of his base. Absolutely amazing.
Steve
@steve, I was ambivalent about the Clinton impeachment, largely because he was nearing the end of his term.
But I always understood that he lied about sexual harassment, that’s why the Judge allowed the question.
42% ain’t chicken feed. In fact it’s very comparable to that of President Obama at this point in.
https://qz.com/889644/obamas-approval-rating-from-his-first-day-to-his-last-in-charts/
PD- I am not a Clinton fan. I would have been happy if they found some crime in the Whitewater investigation that merited prosecution, but they didnt and going after someone for lying about sex seemed really odd.
I think the next potential Trump issue will arrise if they get to look at his taxes. I suspect that with a close look they will find some bad irregularities for which most people would be prosecuted. My preference is that we impeach people moslty for abuse of power crimes, like the current one, or something involving nationalk security. As a lawyer any thoughts about what kinds of white collar crime, if any, merit impeachment?
Steve
Steve, I read your subjective comments sometimes with utter disbelief.
The stats for economic growth under the current president leave Obama’s in distant 2nd place.
At the end of 8 years Obama was sitting on a tepid economy where more small businesses were going under than were being created. Business optimism was dragging, the new GDP norm was 2% with a 1.9% projected to be the figure for 2017, the year after Obama left office. The rust belt was continuing to rust. Many low income people had permanently dropped out of the labor market. Fewer sanctions were put on Russia. Little was being done to counter Russia’s known election meddling, except to tell Putin to “knock it off.†Isis was continuing to thrive. Obama warned Trump of an imminent war with NK. China was rapidly becoming a dominant force, despite Obama promising to address Asia.
All of the above have either turned around or at least been stabilized. Wages for workers have had bigger increases than for managers. Industrial areas are beginning to be revitalized. There is a greater cooperation between the private sector participating in worker training programs. The VA has shown improvement in their care for vets. My husband is one of them who has seen an upward tick in medical responsiveness. I personally love The Right To Try Act bill passed – one of many innovative approaches which other presidents never ventured towards enacting. China has had a world spotlight aimed on their lopsided trading practices, is not being granted lucrative waivers, is not having their unfair behavior being ignored, and worst of all having an administration’s blind eye while they merrily build military installations in the South China Sea (and the small equity firm of Biden’s son magically being given a billion dollars by the Bank of China 10 days after tagging along with his father). Essentially, under Obama’s glazed watch our foreign policy suffered, as did the ability of our domestic economy to grow faster, something that historically follows after a dramatic downturn such as occurred in the 2008 crash.
However, I doubt Steve you will ever be able to see some of the stark and positive contrasts between the 8 years of the past presidency and the current 3+ years of the current leader. Hatred, similar to poison, systemically pollutes reason.
Trump’s tax returns will be complex. Full of potentially dubious valuations and depreciation that were audited but finally accepted by IRS. I wouldn’t release them either. It would open another years worth of investigations.
Gray, the only time we were audited the auditor could find nothing but one deduction made for a bouquet of flowers given to an escrow officer. I kid you not..and he penalized us for that one deduction, feeling good about himself that he had found at least one error to pin on us and rationalize his job.
One can only imagine what could be found and deduced as malfeasance in Trump’s vast holdings. But, that’s what the Democrats want – create any kind of intrusive precedent, that could eventually impact anyone, to satisfy the immediate gratification to destroy the current presidency.
jan- I look at the numbers, not Trump’s rhetoric.
“U.S. gdp growth rate for 2018 was 2.86%, a 0.64% increase from 2017.
U.S. gdp growth rate for 2017 was 2.22%, a 0.65% increase from 2016.
U.S. gdp growth rate for 2016 was 1.57%, a 1.31% decline from 2015.
U.S. gdp growth rate for 2015 was 2.88%, a 0.43% increase from 2014.”
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/gdp-growth-rate
Go look at them for job growth. They have grown at about the same rate with the two presidents. But, and I think it is important bu tunderstand that as a Trump supporter you wont care, in order to get that little bump in 2018 (growth is expected to about 2% this year) Trump cut taxes and we ended up with a large increase in the deficit/debt. Deficits had been dropping. I dont think it is a big economic triumph to achieve economic growth via deficit spending.
Most of everything else you wrote is abobut feelings, ie Trump makes you feel good. Wages, when you account for inflation, are up a little bit. That is one positive I can actually see. However, as Dave noted recently job growth continues to moslty give us not very good jobs.
I can understand anyone who doesnt have to take care of patients liking the Right to Try Act. Those of us who do dont like it since it only serves an ideological purpose. (Cancer researchers and oncologists almost all oppose it. You do know that almost every state already had their own version of RTT, and they weren’t being used?) Fortunately, very few patients are using it. On the VA there have been some changes, after a number of years of planning. Much of that was initiated under the Obama admin. Trump should get some credit (his team), but as always he will take credit for everything, and you will believe him.
China? All talk. Let me know when something happens. ISIS was already mostly over by the time Trump came to office, and was moslty defeted by Russia, Iran and Syria anyway. Of course he takes credit and you agree. Anyway, we just arent going to agree on foreign policy since my goals would be different than yours, and I need to see actual results, not just bragging by POTUS.
In short, you are blinded by your total beleif in Trump and acceptance of anything he says. There is little objectiove evidence to support most of your claims, and you ignore any of the negatives he has generated. I dont hate anyone I dont personally know. I do think Trump is a crook (have thought that since the 80s) and a con man with very poor leadership skills. He is a great salesman and entertainer. He knows how to make his supporters happy better than any POTUS in history. I doubt that you will ever lift a finger to go look for any objective data to support your beliefs.
Steve
“Full of potentially dubious valuations and depreciation that were audited but finally accepted by IRS.”
Or not noticed by the IRS. The IRS is seriously understaffed, purposely, so they dont catch a lot of stuff.
A total of 15 people were convicted of various crimes uncovered in the miscellaneous Whitewater investigations including perjury, conspiracy, fraud, tax evasion, embezzlement, and bribery. The Clintons were never charged with anything. Bill Clinton’s pardoning of several of the individuals convicted as a consequence of those investigations stinks to high heaven.
I think there are several views of the relationship between the president and the economy that have merit and at least one that has no merit. Those that have merit include
a) the president has very little influence over the economy
b) the president is accountable for everything that happens on his or her watch, good or bad
The one that is without merit is that the president is responsible for everything good that happens on her or his watch but not responsible for anything bad that happens on his or her watch.
I lean towards option a) above with one exception. The president is capable of generating what Keynes called “animal spirits”. Reagan was good at it; Bush the Elder was not. Clinton was good at it; neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama were. Is Donald Trump good at encouraging “animal spirits”? I’ll leave you to battle that out among yourselves.
What I will say is that I have been disappointed at the level of business investment that the tax cuts produced. With half of all business investments today being in financial instruments rather than R&D, expansion of facilities, and so on, it takes a lot of incremental investment to produce additional economic growth.
I favor a, but if you are going to claim that your guy is doing good things then you need to have the data to bback it up, and you also have to accept the bad. The data show that there hasn’t been much change in our rate of economic or job growth between Obama and Trump, but Trump had to increase deficits to get his growth. As you note we didnt get much business investment, and that is with tax cuts AND some decrease in regulations. (Not all that much decrease in regs as competence is not a strong point for Trump and co.)
On Whitewater I was referring specifically to Clinton. Would have been nice to see at least one of them in jail. Actually, if there were such a thing as karmic justice we should have Bill and Donald in adjoining cells.
Steve
Re Trump and animal spirits.
The data is can be presented both ways.
Business investment has not gone up. GDP growth has not accelerated past 2% after 2018.
But polls consistently show Trumps approval on the economy is 10 percent higher then his overall job approval rating, and consumer confidence / surveys on economic outlook is highest since the 2000. And worker wages for lowest earners is increasing faster then high earners.
And this in a background of slowing growth or recession with the EU, China, India.
Let’s put it this way, Trump is going to campaign on the economy unlike the last two Presidents.
Link goes ot nice article on lowest income level wage growth. Note that is started before Trump was elected.
https://macroblog.typepad.com/macroblog/2019/12/faster-wage-growth-for-the-lowest-paid-workers.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2FRUQt+%28macroblog%29
Steve
Steve, use your own links. I’m not going to even bother to present dueling ones disputing yours. However, according to Tom Bevan, of Real Clear Politics, Trump has a +12 approval in his handling of the economy. Small business optimism is high – somewhere in the 90 percentile, as is consumer sentiment. Did Obama ever achieve those numbers? Some of the latest economic indicators are showing homeowner traffic and house building permits are up. The stock market has gained 10,000 points since Obama’s presidency ended. Household income has increased. There are more jobs available than those looking for jobs. Even millennials are beginning to move towards household formation, having children – something vital to cultivate healthy economies.
Like Dave referenced earlier, though, maybe it’s primarily “animal spirits†that have been tapped, causing people to be buoyed and feeling better about their futures. Or, maybe the fact somewhere between 6-7 million people have gotten off of welfare bodes well for individuals having a paycheck, rather than government assistance, to pay their own bills.
However, no matter how your perspective differs from mine, hopefully it will be the people deciding their own fate, by being able to vote for either Trump or a dem in the 2020 election, rather than have an unpopular Democrat-led House trying to pull the rug out from under this process by pushing through a quick, partisan impeachment.
BTW, I saw clips of the crowd waiting outside tonight’s MI venue. Some had been there overnight in freezing weather. Others waiting many hours in 17 degree temperatures, 5 degrees if wind chill is included, eventually filling the place to capacity, as more stood outside. Many in the crowd identified as being union families. Somehow, the visuals of those who like what Trump is doing seem more authentic than the sanctimonious speeches being delivered in today’s impeachment vote. As Robert Ray, added tonight after the vote, “it will be an impeachment that will live on in infamy.†I agree.
Steve’s rant aside, here are official BEA numbers. All you have to do is search FRED. GDP comparisons are alway hard because there are so many variables at work, leads and lags and so forth. But this is just the raw numbers the story whether Steve likes it or not.
After the recession sorted itself out, last 5 years Obama – 2.2%
Last two years (what did he convey) – 2.0%
Trump through Q3 – 2.6%.
Future – ????
The difference between 2.6% and 2.0% is huge. Over an 8 year presidential term GDP would grow by 23% vs 17% respectively. That’s not 6%, it’s 30% more GDP growth. And Jan is correct, expectations of 2% as far as the eye could see was the Democrats campaign mantra.
OK, Drew must be lying about his business career. Guys who actually write out checks usually know that if you are “making money” bbut running up your debt you arent really making money. Trump had to have a big increase in the deficit to get his big positive year. Without that his numbers are, likely, the same. And then why do we focus only on GDP, besides the fact that it is the one number that looks good if we ignore the total picture. Job numbers matter too if you arent wealthy. Job quality matters. Pay matters.
jan- Link goes to stock market comparison bbetween Obama and Trump. Which was better? Dare to look? (Personally, I ma not so sure this is something to brag about, but you did bring it up.) As to the rest Morris Albert summed ity up best in his 1975 hit, Feelings.
https://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president
As to the animal spirits thing, I would agree that Trump has a very positive effect on animal spirits, among his followers. You beleive everything he says. You keep throwing out stuff and I show you the data to show that you are wrong, but you still believe. However, he doesnt have that affect on people who are not true believers. So I suspect tha tit might be a wash overall, or maybe a bit positive as rich people moslty vote Republican, but then shouldnt we see some actual evidence? Shouldnt those business investment numbers be going up? Shouldn’t the guality of jobs be improving?
Steve
My belief is in the people and their reaction to government policies, not Trump (or any POTUS), the venal opposition, nor bureaucratic pencil-pushers who are aptly able to manipulate statistics to achieve a desired outcome.