Impeachment Inquiry - ��Ӱ��

Trump’s conduct ‘impeachable,’ legal experts say

Austin R. Ramsey — Fri, 06 Dec 2019 21:04:38 +0000

A panel of legal experts Wednesday testified that President Trump’s campaign to pressure Ukraine paired with his refusal to allow key witnesses to testify constitute impeachable offenses under the law.

Three of the legal experts testifying before the House Judiciary committee were in “total agreement” that Trump’s conduct, and that uncovered by former special counsel Robert Mueller last year, justified swift action on the part of lawmakers.

The professors included Noah Feldman, of Harvard Law School, Michael Gerhardt, of the University of North Carolina School of Law in Chapel Hill, and Pamela Karlan, from Stanford Law School.

A fourth professor, Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University School of Law, testified that the House was moving too swiftly toward impeachment and that more facts still needed to be uncovered.

The witnesses’ testimony marked a crucial next step in the ongoing impeachment inquiry, less than a day after the House Intelligence Committee released a sweeping that could form the backbone for articles of impeachment.

Those articles, should they be drafted, would be born in the judiciary committee, which formally assumed the lead role in the inquiry on Wednesday.

“The storm in which we find ourselves today was set in motion by President Trump,” said Democratic Chairman Jerry Nadler, of New York. “I do not wish this moment on the country. It is not a pleasant task we undertake today. But we have each taken an oath to protect the Constitution, and the facts before us are clear.”

Nadler’s line of questioning and that of the Democrats’ lead counsel Norm Eisen offered an early glimpse at what charges the committee may ultimately deliver.

Nadler repeatedly referenced the published earlier this year. By soliciting a Ukranian investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump’s presumed 2020 rival, the president threatened an upcoming election, Nadler said. But Mueller report revealed that he had done that before, by willingly inviting Russian interference in 2016, he added.

“President Trump welcomed foreign interference in the 2016 election,” Nadler said. “He demanded it for the 2020 election.”

The charges Democrats hinted at included abuse of power and bribery for Trump’s pressure against Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, obstruction of Congress for his refusal to turn over documents and witnesses, and obstruction of justice for his attempts to fire Mueller before the 2018 report had been completed.

The framers’ intent

According to Feldman, a celebrated constitutional scholar, each of those charges represent Trump using his office for personal gains.

“That matters fundamentally to the American people,” he said. “Because if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy; we live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship. That’s why the framers created the possibility of impeachment.”

But the president had staunch allies at Wednesday’s hearing. On at least three different occasions, Republican lawmakers interrupted witness testimony to introduce motions for the hearing to end or to call on Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and the whistleblower whose complaint triggered the impeachment process to testify.

Although Nadler tabled their motions, Republicans forced time-consuming voting procedures that each fell along party lines, 24-17.

A professor’s caution

For his part, Turley, the Republicans’ witness, cautioned Democrats to slow down the impeachment process.

The impeachment clauses that are forming lack any significant case law and the facts that Democrats are alleging have not been adequately proven, he said. Instead, he added, Democrats are approaching the impeachment process from a place of anger.

“I get it,” he said. “You’re mad. The president’s mad. My Republican friends are mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog seems mad — and Luna is a goldendoodle and they don’t get mad.”

But a “slipshod” impeachment process will only result in more “madness,” Turley added.

“This is not how you impeach an American president.”

Update: After this story was filed, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that the against the president. His “abuse of power,” she said, warrants removal from office.

The post Trump’s conduct ‘impeachable,’ legal experts say first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Podcast #3, Nov. 20: Covering previous impeachments and the role of women

Chris Halsne — Thu, 21 Nov 2019 02:49:50 +0000

“The Impeachment Inquiry of Donald J. Trump” is a special edition podcast of ��Ӱ��. Graduate journalism students in the School of Communication at American University talk with media professionals and the public about this historic time.

Hosts Cami Gregorian and Courtney Jacobs report from Washington.

The post Podcast #3, Nov. 20: Covering previous impeachments and the role of women first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Sondland confirms Trump ‘quid pro quo’

Austin R. Ramsey — Thu, 21 Nov 2019 02:18:03 +0000

In sworn testimony before House impeachment investigators Wednesday, Ambassador Gordon Sondland connected President Donald Trump and his personal attorney in a “quid pro quo” relationship involving access to the White House and politically motivated investigations.

Sondland, the country’s top diplomat to the European Union, said Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani facilitated a pressure campaign against Ukraine at the “express direction of the president.”

“Was there a ‘quid pro quo?’” he asked, rhetorically. “With regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes.”

The told the House intelligence committee that Trump appeared most interested in the Ukrainians publicly announcing investigations into the 2016 U.S. presidential election and an oil company for whom former Vice President Joe Biden’s son worked. The president would leverage the promise of White House meetings and phone calls to get those investigations, he added.

He said he grew to believe that the $400 million in held-up military aid to the former Soviet Bloc country was tied to those investigations as well. The connection was a simple calculation, he said — “two plus two equals four.”

Some Trump campaign officials, WH aides, and GOP lawmakers were “blindsided” by Sondland testimony and “freaking out” earlier today, sources tell and me. One source said Sondland’s testimony was “really bizarre,” adding he was throwing top officials under the bus.

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta)

Sondland, who earned his diplomatic title after , provided investigators with text messages and emails that cast the impeachment cloud over Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

They and others were well aware of the administration’s wishes in Ukraine, he said.

“They knew what we were doing and why,” he said. “Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret.”

Wednesday’s testimony promised to intensify an already contentious political climate on Capitol Hill, as Democrats marked the first full week of public impeachment hearings examining the president’s dealings with Ukraine.

Moments after the hearing, Democratic Chair Adam Schiff told reporters Sondland’s testimony was “a very important moment in the history of this inquiry.”

“It goes right to the heart of the issue of bribery as well as other potential high crimes or misdemeanors,” he said.

But Republicans chided Sondland on Wednesday for amending his testimony once already and failing to highlight key defenses.

In particular, Sondland said later he recalled a conversation with Trump during which the president pointedly said there was “no quid pro quo.”

“I want nothing, I want nothing,” Sondland recalled the president saying. “I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.”

According to Sondland’s testimony, Trump made those comments in early September, just as Congress had become aware of a whistleblower complaint accusing the president of wrongdoing and after the pressure campaign had been launched.

The two world leaders did eventually speak on the phone together, said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. The two met in New York and the $400 million in military assistance was eventually delivered.

All of that occurred, Jordan laid out — yet the investigations never did.

“You got all three of them wrong,” Jordan said. “They get the call, they get the meeting, they get the money. It’s not two plus two; it’s (zero) for three. I’ve never seen anything like this.”

Sondland’s testimony was followed by Laura Cooper, special assistant secretary of defense for Russia and Ukraine and David Hale, undersecretary of state for political affairs.

Early in their Wednesday evening, the two shed more light on how long the Ukranian government suspected that delayed military aid was hinged on the announcement of investigations into Trump’s political opponents.

The post Sondland confirms Trump ‘quid pro quo’ first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

An hour of TV time with Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow

Chris Casey — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 23:25:23 +0000

There are two sides to every impeachment story, but where is the truth?

As the impeachment hearings continue, two rival cable news networks are taking radically different approaches to interpreting the events. You could tell by watching Tuesday night, Nov. 19.

Hannity: ‘There was no quid, no pro, no quo’

Tuesday at 9 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Fox News’ Sean Hannity opened his show by calling the hearings a “huge dud” and an “embarrassing spectacle.” A variety of headlines scrolled below him, calling the hearings a “witch trial” and a “sham.”

Lawmakers are holding hearings to figure out if Trump abused his power by pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate his political rivals in a July call. But Hannity defended the president by citing the , saying that Trump never said that he would restrict foreign aid. While it is not explicitly mentioned in the rough transcript, the Washington Post Trump ordered a hold on military aid to Ukraine days before the call.

Hannity rejected the witness’ testimony and insisted the only witness the American people need to hear from is the whistleblower.

“Not one witness was necessary, not a single one,” Hannity said. “There was no quid, no pro, no quo, no pressure, no extortion.”

As the show continued, Hannity said Americans don’t care about the impeachment hearings because fewer people have been watching the hearings on TV than those who tuned into former President Richard Nixon’s impeachment proceedings 45 years ago. (��Ӱ�� 13 million Americans watched the first impeachment hearing Nov. 13, . But “tens of millions” watched unedited tapes of the 1973 impeachment hearings that led to Nixon’s resignation, reported.)

However, it’s difficult to tell how many people watched livestream videos of the hearings as Nielsen doesn’t track that data.

Hannity added the first hearings failed to change public opinion of the inquiry, citing a indicating support for the inquiry has decreased. (In contrast, a released Tuesday suggests most Americans think Trump committed an impeachable offense.)

The guests on his program included Rep. Jim Jordan, who questioned each of the witnesses at the hearings, and the president’s son Donald Trump Jr.

Maddow: Hearings didn’t help the president

While Hannity glossed over Tuesday’s hearings, MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow called them “a double header.”

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and National Security Council advisor Tim Morrison discussed their knowledge of Trump’s relationship to Ukraine in the morning. Jennifer Williams, an aid to Vice President Mike Pence, followed in the afternoon talking about what she overheard during the Trump-Zelensky phone call. Williams said she found the call unusual because it included a discussion of a “domestic political matter.”

According to Maddow, the testimony had not gone the way House Republicans hoped, given that the witnesses were Trump-appointed officials that the Republicans had selected to speak. Their testimony, she said, only served to prove that Trump was guilty of bribery.

“Their testimony wasn’t awesome for the president’s defense,” Maddow said.

Maddow then went on to discuss how the witnesses each played a part in constructing a narrative of Trump’s guilt.

“They’re all fleshing out different parts of the story,” Maddow said, “but it’s one singular story about what the president did and what was wrong with it.”

Maddow’s guests included Rep. Val Demings, D-Florida, who questioned witnesses in the hearing, and Chuck Rosenberg, former Administrator of the Food and Drug Administration.

Two Different Approaches to Cable News Commentary

Maddow’s approach, of a spectator parsing the statements from the hearings, could not be more starkly different than Hannity’s broad condemnation of the entire impeachment process. While Maddow unpacked what was said and used it to confirm her assertions about the president, Hannity did not treat the hearings or the witnesses as legitimate. He focused on perceived apathy toward the hearings by Americans, using metrics like TV ratings and polls about support, in order to drive his message home.

This, however, is in keeping with how Fox News has run for some time, according to Steven Livingston, a media professor at George Washington University.

“I think that will continue until Trump ends up being more of a liability for the right-wing cause,” Livingston said. “What’s going to have to happen is Republican senators would have to start breaking from Trump. At some point, Fox News could start being the lone Trump voice.”

The potential for Fox News commentators to flip on Trump may involve a shifting of focus, rather than of position, according to Peter Loge, associate media professor at George Washington University.

“They could say Trump has to step down and let Pence pick up where he left off, because the distraction of impeachment might trick people into voting for a Democrat,” Loge said.

While MSNBC and Fox represent different ends of the political spectrum, they’re not necessarily ideological opposites.

Media critic Nicole Hemmer two of MSNBC’s main anchors, Joe Scarborough and Nicolle Wallace, once represented Republicans. Scarborough used to be a Republican member of Congress.

“It has become whiter and more conservative in the Trump era,” Hemmer wrote about the network. “Melissa Harris-Perry and Al Sharpton are both out at the network, while Nicolle Wallace, White House director of communications under George W. Bush, now anchors the 4 p.m. hour.”

The post An hour of TV time with Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

History, hope and skepticism in Southeast DC

Kristen Johnson — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 22:09:54 +0000

Washington, D.C., is one of the most liberal cities in the world, giving Trump a measly 4.1 percent of the vote during the 2016 elections. With a front-row seat to history, it might seem like the deep blue city would be abuzz around the impeachment inquiry.

Not everyone in D.C. is excited.

��Ӱ�� spent a day talking to more than a dozen residents in Southeast D.C. and found mixed reactions. While many were eager to closely follow the hearings, some saw the political action as too little, too late — or ineffective.

“That’s not the issue affecting my community right now,” said Ronald Moten when asked about the impeachment inquiry.

Moten said that he was more concerned about gentrification and rising housing prices in his neighborhood; from in Anacostia alone nearly doubled. He has been active in the Don’t Mute DC, a movement to preserve D.C.’s culture as a historically majority black city.

The neighborhoods East of the River face more economic and social challenges than any other ward in the city and people are distrustful that the frenzy of national politics will impact their daily lives, or that politicians like Trump will see any punishment.

An owner of a local boutique off Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue says he only pays attention to local politics. “I believe the power lies within the people,” Jason Anderson said. (Kristen Johnson / ��Ӱ��)

Anacostia resident Bryant Washington, who works at Nationals Park, viewed the hearing Tuesday afternoon with pessimism. He said that if former president Barack Obama had engaged in any of the potentially illegal or, to opponents, corrupt activities that Trump has been accused of, the first African American president would have been forced out of office immediately.

“Anybody else they want to punish – especially black – they would go on and do it,” Washington said. “Since before he got elected, he’s been doing a lot of stuff that they don’t even count him for.”

Julianne Abrams, a Southeast native and full-time caregiver, said she has been keeping up with impeachment because she watches the hearings while caring for her mother. She echoed the idea that lawmakers had waited too long to hold Trump accountable.

“He came in foul,” said Abrams. “He says and does whatever he feels, and it’s all corruption.”

As she stood outside Busboys and Poets talking with her friend she said, “I’m kinda skeptical about it really happening because soon it’ll be close to him leaving anyway. The criminals are leading the world, just doing whatever s— they wanna do.”

Political science studies up close

Since Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi a formal impeachment inquiry against Trump in September, the University of the District of Columbia student Keisha Jones has made it a priority to watch closely.

“I’m a political science major so I try to be into it all,” said Jones. “Impeachment needs to happen because they’re laying the groundwork so he can’t run again and to keep him out of the whole political arena.”

Jones said she is working on a project about the #MeToo movement and felt the impeachment inquiry tied into her work, too. Trump has been of sexual misconduct by at least 25 women. Trump has denied the allegations.

“After this, he needs to be convicted too,” Jones said.

History in his lifetime

The impeachment inquiry against Trump is the first one many people in D.C. have witnessed in their lifetimes.

“It’s historical for me,” said Allan Dubose, Jr., a non-profit employee and part-time bartender. “It’s pretty cool as a younger person just to see that something historical is happening that I’m actually able to tell my kids about.”

Dubose watched the first day of the impeachment hearings and said it has been interesting watching the proceedings, but is uncertain they will lead to something immediate.

“Honestly, in my mind, I think it might be a little later like before the actual presidential race. I think this is just a ploy for a later punishment,” Dubose said.

Kemba Inifo, a bookstore employee, expressed similar views. She said she was glad Congress decided to take action with the impeachment inquiry and became more interested in the process after watching the 2018 documentary “Active Measures” about Russian president Vladimir Putin and Russian interference in the 2016 election.

“After watching that, I really wanted him to be impeached. The fact they’re bringing the proceedings against him, I think, is the right thing to do because the evidence has shown he’s being treasonous.”

A new year

Washington wants to believe that the momentum of the impeachment hearings is an indication that something “big” will happen before the beginning of the new year.

Still Washington said that despite the sudden urgency and overwhelming evidence against Trump, he felt unfazed.

“Trump is a gangster. They know he did wrong and they’re taking their time trying to prove it,” Washington said. Congress is not “going to do it because they don’t even have his taxes yet and they’ve been asking for that ever since he got in there. It’s been four years.”

The post History, hope and skepticism in Southeast DC first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Impeachment inquiry echoes across the Atlantic

Emily Hayes — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 21:46:05 +0000

The details of the impeachment inquiry are difficult to keep up with, but the global influence of America’s political turmoil is profound. Take it from a country with strong ties to the U.S. since World War II.

“Americans don’t realize the great influence they have,” said Francesco Costa, an Italian journalist based in Milan who covers American news and foreign policy.

“For us, if you can understand the other country, you can better understand what is happening here,” Costa said. He was referring to the Italian political leaders who have mirrored the actions, attitudes and policies of American political leaders in recent years.

Neo-nationalist Matteo Salvini became prime minister of Italy in 2018 with the slogan “primi italiani,” the Italian version of President Donald Trump’s “America First” slogan.

And in the same year that Barack Obama ran his presidential campaign with the slogan “Yes we can,” Rome’s mayor Walter Veltroni, the losing candidate, took on right-wing leader Silvio Berlusconi in Italy’s race for prime minister with the slogan “Si può fare,” a direct translation of “Yes we can.”

Costa launched his American news multi-media project, (in English, Coast to Coast), for the Italian news outlet during Trump’s presidential campaign in 2015, and Italians took interest.

Costa’s newsletter has 15,000 subscribers, and his podcast has 20,000 listeners. While these numbers may seem small in an American market, in an Italian market they are significant, especially considering the content is international. La Stampa, a major Italitan news outlet, often refers to podcasts as an “American trend.” There were about 2.7 million podcast listeners in Italy in 2018, according to data from .

Costa said he believes younger Italians are interested in his content because they are “residents of the world,” and follow issues like Brexit and the student protests in Hong Kong.

And the impeachment inquiry into Trump, although still in the early stages, has worldwide consequences, he said.

Italian newspaper published an article on President Donald Trump’s response to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s invitation for him to testify during the impeachment inquiry on 18 November 2019 with the headline: “Trump: I could testify on the impeachment. ‘I like the idea, I value it.’ The wrath of the tycoon against Pompeo.” (Courtesy of La Stampa)

“When President Trump feels under attack, he becomes aggressive on tariffs, immigration,” which impacts European trade and relations with the United States, Costa said, reflecting the views of political leaders and experts in Italy.

But if Trump is removed from office, Italy would benefit from a “more calm, more rational” American administration. For example, Trump has suggested European countries were taking advantage of the U.S. and not paying their NATO contribution, CBS News .

Giorgio Fruscione, a researcher on Europe and global governance, said the relationship between Trump’s administration and Europe has been more strained than previous administrations. Other policy experts believe the impeachment process poses a problem for the 2020 presidential elections.

Franco Bruni, vice president of the Italian Institute for International Political Studies, said Trump and his political opponents will continue to discuss impeachment throughout their campaigns, which is “much less interesting than discussion on health care systems, education.”

Major Italian newspapers like , and , are providing Italian audiences with breaking news coverage of impeachment inquiry updates.

Italian newspaper La Stampa ran early this morning on U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s testimony, citing a quote in the headline: “Trump ordered pressure on Ukraine.” (Courtesy of La Stampa)

“We experience Trump fatigue,” Costa said of the scandals pouring out of the United States and into his purview as a foreign policy journalist, though “we are not an example of stability in government.”

In the parliamentary system of Italy, the prime minister can be cast out with a single vote from the Italian parliament, as opposed to individual votes from the House of Representatives and the Senate – two bodies of Congress that are often opposed to each other based along party lines.

Impeachment is a “traumatic thing that never really happens” for the American people, said Costa. It is increasing polarization and encouraging right-wing radicalism, according to Costa.

People are “more angry, more intolerant,” Costa said. And this attitude is spilling into European politics. Nationalism on the rise across the Atlantic, mirroring America’s era of Trump politics.

Trump’s removal from office would be a big story, even in a country run by two anti-establishment parties facing a struggling economy.

—–

Some interviews were translated from Italian to English by the author.

The post Impeachment inquiry echoes across the Atlantic first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Advocates: Impeachment hearings spotlight sentiment about immigrants of all types

Yousef Alshammari — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 21:32:15 +0000

Lawyers, advocates and immigrants view some of the reaction to the impeachment hearings as a broad reflection of what they see as Trump’s immigration ideology.

So far, three witnesses testifying before the House Intelligence Committee hearings are immigrants.

Marie Yovanovitch, who was born in Canada, is a daughter of immigrants fleeing the Soviet Union, Lt. Col. Alex Vindman was brought to the U.S. by his father who fled a Soviet-controlled Ukraine and Fiona Hill’s coal miner father brought her from Northern England for better economic opportunities.

Most of the attention has been on Vindman and Yovanovitch. Immigration advocates have noticed.

All three witnesses earned Ivy League degrees and held positions in service to the U.S. Vindman and Yovanovitch faced the same “duality” accusations by the Trump administration that other immigrants go through as well, said former Maryland State Delegate Maricé Morales, now an immigration lawyer.

Conservative media have been critical of Vindman. Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade said that Vindman “tends to feel sympatico with the Ukraine,” according to Newsweek. Trump also attacked Yovanovitch, prompting the Democrats to push back with claims of “witness intimidation.”

The “treatment of Vindman” represents the “irony of Trump’s relationship with immigration,” Morales said. She explained how the “blatant anti-immigrant sentiment” of questioning Ukranian-born Vindman’s loyalty to the U.S. symbolizes “Trump’s disloyalty to the American people.”

Vindman showed up in his military uniform this week to show his collection of awards and his “high- ranking positions in U.S. service,” Morales said. But “Republican congressmen questioned his loyalty simply because he’s an immigrant.”

In the hearing GOP legal counsel raised the issue of Vindman being offered a high-ranking position in the Ukrainian government; Vindman said it was “comical.”

Morales, who is also the youngest Latina to serve at the state level in the country, said although immigration policies aren’t at the heart of the impeachment hearings, the Ukraine scandal is suitable because it’s most accessible to the public.

Marie Yovanovitch and Alex Vindman both come from parents who lived under Soviet rule. (Yousef Alshammari / ��Ӱ��, Associated Press, Getty Images)

Trump policies on immigration

Morales said she has officially endorsed Elizabeth Warren and highlighted the importance of voting when it comes to new leadership.

For immigration advocacy veteran Douglas Rivlin, political change also comes with voting.

Rivlin, who serves as the director of communications at America’s Voice, an immigration advocacy organization, said what lies in the “heart of the Ukraine scandal” is “Trump’s decisions based on his own self interest which also explains a lot of Trump’s immigration policies.”

An reports that 34% of the American public consider “dissatisfaction with the government and poor leadership” as the most important problem facing the country.

The same poll reports 13% consider immigration as the most important problem. The two mentioned categories are the highest on the list of options that include racism and poverty as choices.

“That’s why I think Congress is correct in pursuing the Ukraine case,” he said. “Even though there are any number of other policies that are outside the law, are screaming for more congressional oversight, and need strong pushback in the courts.”

When asked if her field has seen drastic change with the Trump administration, immigration lawyer Eileen Blessinger said immigration policies under Trump have made her clients’ lives more difficult than before.

“It will take years upon years to undo this,” Blessinger said of circuit and appellate courts dismissing the authority of immigration courts, a legal phenomenon she said Trump empowered.

To solidify their clients’ cases, immigration lawyers seek psychological verification for trauma. Gabriela Romo, a psychologist with a specialty in dealing with a range of immigrants, said “I have more clients since Trump.”

When it comes to impeachment and immigration related news cycles, “the fear and anxiety of being deported” by Trump is a recurring theme she said.

Romo said “watching the news is a trigger that reminds traumatized immigrants about the abandonment and the risk of danger” they constantly face.

Contributing: Matt Thibault

The post Advocates: Impeachment hearings spotlight sentiment about immigrants of all types first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Three miles away, no talk of impeachment

Verónica Del Valle — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 19:58:08 +0000

Politically, former ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley held a relatively low profile after leaving left her two-year cabinet position in the Trump administration late last year. She returned to her home state of South Carolina, joined the board of a major company and wrote an autobiography.

The former ambassador has tread a fine line since her departure, championing the Trump administration even as both parties scramble to control the narrative surrounding the impeachment inquiry.

”I think, again, her long goal is to rebuild the Republican Party as a Big Tent party which is not alienating to minority groups,” said Geoffrey Kabaservice, now director of Political Studies at moderate think tank the Niskanen Center. Kabaservice published a 2012 history on the decline of moderates within the party.

In Haley’s book, she accuses former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly of attempting to thwart Trump’s agenda in office. In doing so, she staked a clear claim in Trump’s camp, even as she has been mildly critical of some of his policies and behavior.

Brushed off with a laugh

Her book tour brought her to Washington D.C. – and the maelstrom of politics at the moment – on Nov. 14 when she spoke in front of an audience of students at George Washington University to discuss her memoir, With All Due Respect. She made it local by saying that her daughter is looking at attending the university.

A group of excited students speculated that the ambassador would have to be pushed on the topic of impeachment.

Outside the auditorium, another group of around 35 campus activists gathered to protest Haley’s policies as UN ambassador and position on the Boeing Board of Directors, chanting phrases like “Nikki, Nikki, can’t you see, coups don’t bring democracy.” The student group accused Haley of profiting off of and against other nations. Police stood behind the protestors while late attendees filtered in.

Student activists protested Nikki Haley’s track record as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. outside the steps of the Lisner Auditorium. (Verónica Del Valle / ��Ӱ��)

Haley made it clear that her road to the UN was wholly unconventional. Initially, the former state legislator and governor endorsed Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., during the 2016 Republican primaries. Trump tweeted during the primary that South Carolinians are embarrassed by Haley.

Now Haley says that her relationship with the president is one of respect. “I knew that if you kicked him, he was gonna holler. He knew if he pushed me, I was gonna push back,” she said at the George Washington University event.

The president and his former chief of staff, Reince Preibus, attempted to appoint Haley as Secretary of State at the start of his term. During that initial meeting, Trump welcomed her with one phrase, she said:

“Well, I guess your guy didn’t win.”

Haley’s on-stage conversation with Sen. Jodi Ersnt, R-Iowa, focused on her achievements as a conservative woman. The former governor talked about battling racism as the young daughter of Indian immigrants in the rural South.

But the conversation kept creeping back to Trump.

Haley refused to denounce the president during her appearance, despite pushing back on some of his antics. She discussed some of Trump’s most memorable moments with ease.

Prior to the president’s UN debut in 2017, the ambassador urged Trump to treat his address like “church,” reminding him that the audience was legions away from his past campaign rallies. Still, Trump publicly called North Korean leader Kim Jong-un “Little Rocket Man” before the delegation.

She laughed recounting the president’s reply: “I tweeted it out this morning and it killed with my base.”

This answer was typical of the tenor of the event. Haley repeatedly brought up policy differences with the president and differences in political style, but often brushed them off with a laugh or a joke.

Criticizes, but never condemns

Looming over everything were impeachment hearings, which had kicked off the day before, less than three miles from the university. The hearings by the House of Representatives are over Trump’s conduct involving military aid to Ukraine.

But, neither woman on stage uttered the word “impeachment.”

Ernst did not ask about impeachment and questions that had been selected from the audience did not touch on the issue, instead focusing on Haley’s views on bipartisanship.

In recent weeks, however, Haley has been repeatedly questioned about impeachment during television appearances. She has repeatedly condemned the impeachment investigation, even though she said that Trump’s call to Zelensky was

“The thing that bothers me about the impeachment is we’re less than a year away from an election. Let the people decide,” said Haley to .

Despite her skepticism about impeachment, she has called for the protection of the anonymous whistleblower who initially raised complaints. Haley emphasized that the whistleblower must be protected to after Trump called for the informant’s identity to be revealed.

This is characteristic of Haley’s stance. She criticizes, but never condemns his actions.

“We’re less than a year away from an election. Let the people decide.”

Kabaservice, the political studies expert on moderates and Republicans, said that Haley is attempting to appease both camps of the Republican party during a fractious time for the GOP. He speculated that Haley is positioning herself for a potential presidential run in 2024, a notion that has been .

Haley spoke to the demographic divides during her event, proclaiming that the party must do a better job of welcoming women while also condemning Democrats for their of conservative women, like Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y.

For the former ambassador, these critiques signal the end of civility in American politics, a notion espoused by moderate politicians like Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, who announced he earlier in 2019.

Trump has been widely criticized for hurting notions of civility in politics, routinely to rivals as “fake” or “nut jobs.”

Kabaservice claims that Haley never been moderate, but instead a “pragmatic conservative.”

”One way or another Donald Trump is going to be out of the White House by 2024. She wants to throw her hat in for the next race,” said Kabaservice. “For that, she needs to do two things: to not alienate herself from Trump’s base [and] to be prepaired for a backlash against the Republican Party.”

The post Three miles away, no talk of impeachment first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Once the realm of the tinfoil hat club, conspiracy theories find their way to Congress

Matt Thibault — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 19:42:51 +0000

Impeachment watchers already have to parse a complicated political process, but now they have something else to sift through: conspiracy theories.

Theories that started in fringe online communities have made their way to center-stage in Congress, as the House of Representatives goes into the second week of impeachment hearings. The hearings are part of an inquiry into allegations that U.S. President Donald Trump asked the Ukranian government to investigate the family of political rival and former Vice President Joe Biden.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle opened the impeachment hearing on Nov. 13 by referencing “CrowdStrike,” the name of a theory that the Ukranian government, not the Russian government as determined by the , meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections using a server owned by the company CrowdStrike. There is for this theory. Meanwhile, Russia’s interference has been by federal investigators and intelligence experts.

CrowdStrike found itself at the center of the impeachment inquiry after the release of a rough transcript of a July phone call between Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine.

During the call — in which Trump allegedly tied U.S. military aid to a request that the Ukranian president investigate the business relationships of Joe Biden’s son Hunter — the U.S. president also mentioned CrowdStrike in passing.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., called the CrowdStrike theory “discredited” in his opening statement on Nov. 13.

The leading Republican on the committee, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., offered a stark contrast. While he didn’t explicitly mention CrowdStrike, he alluded to it, accusing Democrats of working with Ukraine to influence in the election.

“The Democrats cooperated in Ukrainian election meddling, and they defend Hunter Biden’s securing of a lavishly paid position with a corrupt Ukrainian company all while his father served as vice president,” Nunes said. He did not cite any specific evidence to back up this claim in his statement.

Other popular conspiracies

As Congress heads into the second week of impeachment hearings, CrowdStrike is not the only conspiracy theory that has emerged. Nunes also accused Democrats on the intelligence committee of trying to get nude photos of Donald Trump during his opening statement on Nov. 13. Steve Castor, the intelligence committee Republican counsel, also seemed to give credence to a popular conspiracy theory when he asked whether a key witness, former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, was aware that evidence used to convict former Trump campaign official Paul Manafort, “may have been doctored.” A popular fringe theory is that the notorious “black ledger” that detailed from former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych to Paul Manafort was forged.

There is no evidence to support either the theory that Democrats or that evidence in Paul Manafort’s trial was .

For a politician, especially one of Trump’s status, touting any sort of conspiracy is unheard of, according to political science experts.

David Barker, a professor of government at American University and Director of the Center of Presidential and Congressional Studies, said he “couldn’t emphasize enough” how unprecedented this behavior is.

“There hasn’t been a really high-profile politician, let alone a president, who would give any credence to any conspiracy theory,” Barker said.

CrowdStrike, however, has garnered the most attention in the news cycle out of any other tale, and it’s also fed by seeming corroboration from elected politicians, such as Nunes and Trump.

Why does CrowdStrike matter?

Trump has promoted many conspiracy theories in the past. Most notably, he was one of the proponents of , the malicious theory that insinuated that Barack Obama wasn’t actually a United States citizen by birth, and therefore ineligible for the role of President. Business Insider published an detailing 24 different conspiracy theories that Trump has pushed over the years, ranging from asbestos to the death of conservative Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia.

Conspiracy theories can serve as a powerful political tool and direct scrutiny towards rival politicians, according to one political scientist who specializes in them.

Joseph Uscinski is a professor of political science at the University of Miami and the author of American Conspiracy Theories with Joseph Parent. Uscinski believes that theories like CrowdStrike are being used to deflect blame, noting that it’s easier to avoid scrutiny when someone else looks guilty.

Uscinski, however, said that the conspiracies wouldn’t have much of an effect on impeachment, as most people are split right down party lines on the issue. He thought they would serve to help rationalize beliefs people already have.

“Most people aren’t paying attention at all, and the ones that are already have their minds made up,” Uscinski said.

Trump’s attractiveness to fringe groups and theories has alarmed experts, and Barker believes that more disturbing ramifications are yet to come. He believes that if Trump is reelected in 2020, assuming he is not impeached, then politicians will do what they do best and mimic the winner’s strategy.

“If somebody wins, then that becomes the new normal, and I think that will become the new normal if Trump wins reelection,” Barker said.

Looking forward, Barker wouldn’t be surprised if someone came forward out of the left and became the next form of Trump, embracing the demagoguery that Trump has embraced. Along with that, his vision is bleak for what comes next.

“There might not be a lot of hope for us to do anything about it. This isn’t strictly about conspiracy theories, but about the public’s trend towards believing what they want regardless of what the facts are,” Barker said.

The post Once the realm of the tinfoil hat club, conspiracy theories find their way to Congress first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Protected: Impeach Thanksgiving? A guide to dodge impeachment arguments with family and friends

Wash staff — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 19:01:01 +0000

The post Protected: Impeach Thanksgiving? A guide to dodge impeachment arguments with family and friends first appeared on ��Ӱ��.

Impeachment Inquiry - ��������Ӱ��