Reading this Washington Post article on the “Democrats in disarray” was quite a depressing experience. The piece concludes with the following quote from short-time presidential candidate Eric Swalwell of California who sits on the House Intelligence Committee:
“As president, he just overwhelms us,” lamented Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a former 2020 presidential candidate. “I mean, you’ve got kids in cages — we’re trying to deal with that. We’ve got the continued mass shootings, and he won’t help us with that. And then you’ve got the urgency of this [oversight]. So, I mean, it’s really just kind of, where do you prioritize your resources and your time?”
Maybe it’s just me but I don’t think people are inclined to follow leaders who freely admit being overwhelmed and having no real idea of what to do. The same can said for political parties.
So, I have a solution.
The Democrats in Congress should follow a very basic and easy to understand strategy.
1. Declare that the president has committed and is committing many impeachable offenses and provide a list with brief explanations for each charge.
2. Consolidate these investigations into a special committee under the leadership of Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, but also including other key chairpersons like Richard Neal of Ways & Means, Maxine Waters of Financial Services, Adam Schiff of the Intelligence, Adam Smith of Armed Services and Eliot Engel of Foreign Affairs.
3. Use the special committee’s hearings to bring in legislative and constitutional experts to explain and build the case for why Trump’s crimes violate statutes and the separation of powers in the Constitution.
4. Ask the public to demand that the Republicans lend support to their efforts to remove the president from office based on their findings.
5. Hold a debate in the House on each of the charges.
6. Vote to impeach the president.
7. Demand a trial in the Senate.
8. If that trial is denied, tell the American people that the only remaining solution is to vote Trump and as many congressional Republicans as possible out of office.
9. If a trial is held and Trump is acquitted, then make the same argument as above.
10. Campaign hard in 2020.
The Democrats need to keep it simple and not going chasing every new squirrel that appears. Trump doesn’t need to be removed because he puts children in cages or solicits electoral help from foreign powers or for any other distinct cause. He needs to be removed to protect our system of government. So, the system of government is the plaintiff here. The crimes are offenses against the plaintiff. We should not be debating Trump’s sex life or who stayed at his golf resorts. We should be explaining that the president cannot violate treaties, ignore congressional subpoenas, suborn perjury, obstruct justice, violate the Emoluments Clause, make illegal appointments, blow off the statutory language of laws, engage in bribery and extortion and corrupt the pardon process. He cannot commit campaign finance crimes, withhold foreign aid for personal profit, engage in criminal conspiracies, or use the organs of state to financially intimidate the free press.
What matters is that atrocities are documented, but each atrocity doesn’t need to be exhaustively documented and every crime doesn’t have to be fully examined, especially because the president makes that impossible.
At the end of the process, there should be a list of things that Congress is on the record insisting that the president cannot do. This is more for future presidents than for Trump. If the best we can do is have the House of Representatives on the record as saying many of Trump’s actions are impeachable offenses, that will still be powerful even if the Senate acquits. Of course, the people have to do their part too. They have to vote Trump out next year along with many Republicans in Congress. If they do, then the acquittal won’t carry as much weight as the impeachment.
In a way, the goal is to go after Trump by making this as unspecific to Trump as possible. It’s not whether he did or did not do something as much as it’s about asserting what a president cannot do.
Set that marker down, and let the chips fall where they may.
Yes, please.
(Alternatively, have the Judiciary committee proceed with its impeachment investigation, and have the other committees hold complementary* hearings/investigations.)
That means, for example:
*Don’t hold televised hearings that conflict with Judiciary.
*Don’t investigate anything that distracts from Judiciary’s impeachment agenda.
*Agree on messaging and stick to it. (Especially all committee chairs and party leadership. When in doubt or disagreement, defer to Nadler’s judgment.)
This week we have been watching what leadership looks like, in the guise of a tiny and painfully shy Swedish teenager who one day just said “NO” to waiting for adults to address climate change seriously. In doing so she changed the world. Speaker Pelosi (as much as I adore her) simply doesn’t understand how to be an opinion leader. Hearings need to be held, to be very public, and the whole damn caucus needs to be out there talking about Trump’s criminality and unpresidential behavior in every available venue. Martin’s list, pared down, should be part of every democrats talking points, every time they talk. If republicans could make baseless accusations about Benghazi and emails their constant talking points, surely Dems should be able to make well founded behavior by Trump into an unavoidable narrative.
Pelosi is a good choice for speaker if your aim is to get some legislation passed. She is not a good choice if you need a special committee to conduct a very public inquiry into very grave matters regarding the president. Her strength has always been the backroom negotiation, not public speaking. Ideally she would recognize that, and cede control of the special committee and the whole process to Nadler or Schiff, letting them set the agenda and letting them decide when to vote on what.
Backroom negotiation is what is needed—someone in leadership who’s pulling back the reins on lefties who get too far ahead of the caucus, and also reassuring moderates that Nadler, et al, will handle this right, using polls to remind members that failing to go after Trump will hurt them with Dem voters next year, etc.
Tip O’Neill played that role as majority leader in 1973-74. He was new in the job, and a terrible speaker on television. The speaker, Carl Albert, was an alcoholic.
It may be that Pelosi (or Hoyer, or Clyburn, or someone else) is playing that role now. If so, it would help if they’d step up their efforts.
Yes! Thank you. I will pass this on to my congressman, Rep. Cummings, with my strenuous endorsement.
Send it along for someone to post it on the wall along with my comment.
Did you send this off to Nadler, Schiff and Pelosi? They need a lot of help there it appears to get their shit together. When you do, tell them we are pissed off you idiots can’t seem to get this going. Imagine a corrupt criminal who has lied thousands of times and no one is going after his ass? WTF?
Thanks, Martin, but this is too practical and decisive and confrontational (and, well, leader-like) for House Democrats to embrace it. Why, it’s almost as if you want them to get out in FRONT of the R messaging machine for a change!! Sarcasm aside, why the F they haven’t been doing this already I can’t imagine; with Democrats in control of the amount and pace of hearings and the evidence adduced, it should be impossible for an impeachment vote to happen before its time; strategizing a constellation of hearings as you suggest to keep up a steady drip drip drip of revelations (and reminders) of crimes committed, right up to the 2020 elections, should be vital, and easily accomplished, I’d think. I don’t think anyone but Pelosi and the leadership ‘know’ what the plan is, certainly there’s nothing out here but not necessarily informed speculation. Do you know what ‘the plan’ is, Martin? (I just hope there is one…)
Democrats are so ineffectual when it comes to messaging. Worse than ineffectual; incompetent!
There’s a WHY to your assessment. Any ideas?
What don’t you understand about “We will follow the facts where they lead on the path of where we are going and pursue those facts where they lead”?
Martin you are talking about standing up for principles and taking a moral stand. The ONLY reason not to impeach is if Pelosi believes that Americans have no principles and are amoral. And if she believes that needs to retire her cynical ass.
Martin, I don’t always agree with you, but spot on here.
Damn, I wish I could share this on social media, but it’s restricted to Prime. This is something a whole lot of Dems need to know. I see so many out there flailing and misunderstanding how to chart an effective path forward.
With each particular National Trumpalist abuse/crime, simply enter mainstream news accounts of it into the record, and subpoena documents and witnesses (this has already occurred for numerous incidents). When Der Trumper (universally) refuses to provide any of the requested evidence, deem the stonewalling as failure to respond and definitive proof of the allegation. Then collect all the charges deemed proven into Articles of Impeachment. Shouldn’t take more than a month, based on the existing mountain of impeachable offenses already reported.
Forget the nonsense of waiting for some court or other to rule on enforcing subpoenas. That’s a dead end, just following the slow lane to Roberts’ Repubs—which is exactly where Der Trumper wants to be. If an American dope can’t understand that the prez is supposed to promptly comply with Congressional requests for info, then waiting for court rulings (especially a future illegitimate 5-4 Roberts ruling upholding Trumper’s stonewalling) isn’t going to educate them, they are way beyond hope or reclamation.
The problem appears to be quite a number of Dem reps who believe there is some critical slice of the electorate that think Trump shouldn’t have been elected, but that it would be a greater outrage to impeach him. Sort of like the strange situation with the (failed) recall of the WI Trumpite guv, Scott Walker. It may very well be that a completely failed electorate is the ultimate problem, not a hapless Dem leadership. If that’s the case, the Dems should at least go down trying to lead…..
Trump is on the media all the time, all the frigging time. To effectively check this guy the Dems have to do the same. When he tweets, a dem tweets. When he says news is fake a dm says no it’s not. When he lies, say so. And when will they actually say they are conducting an impeachment inquiry ?
So there’s this headline on Huff Post ” Pompeo backs Rudy Giuliani’s role……….” So where is the dem telling everyone what is going on here? leave if alone and everyone will say. yeah he is right, more dem fake news. Now tell me how we boot this ass out of there.
Apparently Nancy read your post 😉