Posts

Covid-19 Relief Bill

Lawmakers Continue To Push Leaders For Covid-19 Relief Bill As Pandemic Worsens 

/in , /by

Lawmakers across the US are putting heavy pressure on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Minority Leader Charles Shumer to reach another Covid-19 relief package by Christmas. 

The coronavirus pandemic has now infected over 14 million Americans and killed over 280,000. Additionally, over 22 million Americans lost their jobs due to pandemic related reasons, and many are worried about the future as the new year approaches and annual payments begin to creep in. 

Embed from Getty Images

Senate Republicans are especially putting the pressure on McConnell, and telling him that he should agree to a deal soon, even if it means exceeding the $500 billion price point he would try to stay under for the relief package. 

Senator Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Bill Cassidy even presented a $908 billion compromise proposal to McConnel this Thursday as a means of motivating him and other leaders to get on a decision. Murkowski was able to speak with the press afterwards as well:

“People are frustrated, there’s no question about it. I just think it’s imperative we get something done before we leave.”

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, who won her reelection this November, also spoke with the press about the “extreme frustration” from voters that she saw on her campaign trail. “People are desperate,” and with daily new cases in the US exceeding 100,000 almost everyday, the country has quite literally never needed a relief bill more. 

Embed from Getty Images

Pelosi and Schumer have both implied that they would be endorsing the $908 billion compromise proposal; a surprising switch up after the two initially set the goal of a bill that would be worth $2.2 trillion. However, it still remains unclear whether these two sides will be able to reach an agreement, but if one thing is for sure, the rest of the country will continue to suffer while they wait around to make a decision. 

Romney explained to McConnell recently that their proposal would spend $160 billion for state and local governments: “We described how it would be allocated, how it would be distributed, some portions based on population, some portion based on the revenue gap that might exist for a locality, and so forth. So we went through the particulars that we’re describing as well as listen to his thoughts about liability coverage.”

Other Republicans think McConnell needs to accept a much larger package that would provide coronavirus-related liability protections for institutions like schools, businesses, nonprofit groups, and religious organizations. Pelosi and McConnell had their first phone call since the election recently where they expressed that they wanted to pass some sort of relief bill as soon as possible. 

Pelosi claimed to reporters that they would have an agreement on the coronavirus relief package by December 11th, however, many Americans are frustrated with the fact that after such an intense election season, the individuals who were voted into office are still doing little to nothing to get this financial assistance/support programs to the hundreds of millions of citizens who are unemployed and struggling while our government leaders argue over how many billions should be given to us.

American Flag

President Trump Will Be Impeached Tonight

/in , /by

Currently, members of the House of Representatives are debating the articles of impeachment that were approved by the House Judiciary Committee last week. All Republicans are expected to vote against impeachment, and nearly all Democrats will vote to impeach. Former Republican representative Justin Amash, who changed his party to Independent after criticizing the president’s conduct with Ukraine, will also vote to impeach. Members of the House of Representatives will have the opportunity to speak today as they list their reasons for or against impeachment before they vote. The arguments they are presenting, often in a raised voice, are repetitive and predictable; Democrats stress the urgency of removing Trump from office due to the national security risk he imposes, whereas Republicans criticize the process and partisan nature of the proceedings, defend the president’s behavior, and accuse Joe Biden and others of misconduct. As Democrats control more than half of the seats in the House of Representatives, it’s virtually certain that the president will be impeached after a vote which is scheduled to take place tonight.

Embed from Getty Images

Though impeachment is now a virtual certainty, the timeline for when it will occur may change. That is because Republicans have done nearly everything in their power to delay the proceedings, forcing a vote to dismiss them, which of course failed, and engaging in other tactics to delay the inevitable. Depending on how long today’s proceedings run, the vote may be rescheduled for tomorrow morning. This happened last week, when Jerry Nadler moved to wait until the following morning to vote on whether to approve articles of impeachment and send them to the full house after the proceedings ran late into the night. Nadler wanted to avoid criticism that the vote took place late at night, and thus at a time when most people would not be paying attention, so he instead called the vote at 9 AM the next day. Depending on how much time the debate before the vote takes, Democrats may choose to do so again, given the importance and level of controversy surrounding impeachment.

Pelosi reiterated her stance that she desperately wanted to avoid impeachment, fearing the damage it would do to the country, but the president’s conduct left her no choice

As usual, the president gave his opinion on today’s impeachment on Twitter, tweeting a common refrain that the investigation is a witch hunt and his behavior was perfect. In all capital letters, and using several exclamation points, Trump urged his followers to pray for him, an apparent response to Nancy Pelosi’s claim that she prays for the president “all the time.” Trump expressed offense at this remark, accusing Pelosi of lying and claiming she hates him; in response, Pelosi reiterated her claim, and when asked whether she hated the president, she angrily rebuked the charge, offended by the use of the word “hate.” When asked why she thought Trump accused her of lying about praying for him, she said that Trump constantly projects the truth about himself by accusing others of the same wrongdoing he is in fact engaged in, so because Trump does not pray for Pelosi, he believes she must be lying about  praying for him. The conflict escalated when Trump sent Pelosi an angry six-page letter, written very much in the style of his tweets, full of capital letters, exclamation points, and baseless accusations. Pelosi stated that she didn’t read the full letter as she is too busy, but that she got the gist of it, and described it as “sick.”

Embed from Getty Images

In keeping with her commitment to solemnity and prayerfulness during this process, Pelosi and other female Democrats dressed in black clothing to set a somber tone for the day. In her remarks, Pelosi reiterated her stance that she desperately wanted to avoid impeachment, fearing the damage it would do to the country, but the president’s conduct left her no choice as she and other Democrats feel they would be derelict in their duties if they did not vote to impeach. Tonight’s vote will officially ensure that a trial of some sort will take place in the Senate, which is expected to happen in January, though the details of the trial are as-of-yet unknown.

Impeachment Trial

Speaker Pelosi Directs Congress to Draft Articles of Impeachment

/in , /by

During a brief formal address conducted yesterday morning, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi publicly announced that she had asked members of Congress to begin drafting articles of impeachment, removing virtually all doubt that President Trump will become the third president in American history to be impeached. As such, yesterday was an important day in American history, as presidential impeachment is a constitutional provision meant to be employed only in the most dire of circumstances. 

Accordingly, Pelosi took the occasion to urge members of Congress and the American public to treat the proceedings soberly, somberly, and prayerfully, emphasizing that she considers the impeachment of an American president to be a sad and serious thing. Pelosi considers this impeachment as having nothing to do with politics and everything to do with the Constitution, saying that members of Congress have an obligation to proceed with it even if it might hurt Democrats’ chances of reelection next year. According to Pelosi, impeachment is now a necessary step for members of Congress to honor their oath of office to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Embed from Getty Images

Later that day, Pelosi held a press conference during which she fielded questions about impeachment as well as questions about legislation, including a bill designed to lower the cost of prescription drugs. While most of the conference was relatively standard, involving questions that Pelosi had already answered in other contexts, a notable interaction transpired just as Pelosi was preparing to end the event. As she left the podium, a reporter asked Pelosi whether she hates the President, prompting an angry rebuke from the Speaker. “I don’t hate anybody,” she said, returning to the podium. “This is about the Constitution of the United States and the facts that lead to the president’s violation of his oath of office. And as a Catholic, I resent your using the word ‘hate’ in a sentence that addresses me. I don’t hate anyone… So don’t mess with me when it comes to words like that.”

The moment, involving an unusual display of strong emotion from the Speaker, highlighted the atmosphere of tension surrounding congressional proceedings during a time when the ideological and partisan divide that characterizes American politics has perhaps never been so wide. Shortly afterwards, the hashtag #DontMessWithNancy trended on Twitter, and while some commentators on the right criticized the Speaker for her passionate answer, others praised Pelosi for her response to a question that was characterized as accusatory and unfair.

While Pelosi may not wish to be remembered for impeachment, given the import of the present moment, it is likely that historians will consider the reluctant choice to impeach the most important decision of her career and indeed among the most important decisions made in American history.

Last night, Pelosi participated in a town hall event hosted by CNN during which she answered questions from the audience and from CNN reporter Jake Tapper. Predictably, most of the questions concerned impeachment, though at one point Pelosi requested that the audience ask about other topics. In response to a question about how she wanted to be remembered for her role in the impeachment process, Pelosi replied that she did not want to be remembered for impeachment but instead for her role in passing legislation like the Affordable Care Act which had a positive effect on people’s lives. That being said, Pelosi explained that she hoped people would understand that she is not happy about impeaching Trump, but that his actions left her with no choice, as she believes that the president had directly violated his oath of office and that American democracy is in jeopardy as a result. Forebodingly, she warned that “civilization as we know it is at stake” in the 2020 election.

Embed from Getty Images

Pelosi had long resisted the idea of impeaching Trump, despite immense pressure from within her own party to hold the president accountable for obstruction of justice offenses as outlined in the Mueller Report. She considers impeachment to be a constitutional remedy to be employed only in the most dire of circumstances, and had nine months ago expressed that President Trump was “just not worth it.” Indeed, Pelosi is no stranger to pressure from Democrats to impeach a president, as calls for impeachment were made during the Bush administration in the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq despite the lack of good evidence that weapons of mass destruction existed in the country. During this episode, while Pelosi understood clearly that insufficient intelligence existed to justify invading Iraq, she did not consider impeaching Bush for it, as she thought that this was not a matter that involved violations of the Constitution.

Pelosi, however, articulated the circumstances that led her to change her mind by quoting Thomas Paine, who during the American Revolution opined that “the times have found us.” While Pelosi may not wish to be remembered for impeachment, given the import of the present moment, it is likely that historians will consider the reluctant choice to impeach the most important decision of her career and indeed among the most important decisions made in American history.

White House

White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Confirms Quid Pro Quo

/in , /by

Ever since explosive allegations of misconduct which the House of Representatives have deemed worthy of opening an impeachment investigation were released to the press, the White House’s defense has been that the President’s request for Ukraine to open up an investigation into Joe Biden’s son was not improper because there was no quid pro quo, or an exchange of something of value. However, text messages released by Congress in addition to a reconstructed transcript released by the White House itself strongly suggest the presence of a quid pro quo in the form of withholding military aid in exchange for an investigation intended to damage the President’s chief political rival. 

The White House has responded to the impeachment investigation by illegally refusing to cooperate with Congress, on the grounds that they view the investigation as illegitimate, while simultaneously asserting that there was no wrongdoing. Yesterday, however, the White House’s defense became even more tenuous, as White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney all but admitted the presence of a quid pro quo relationship between the President and Ukraine.

Embed from Getty Images

Mulvaney, who confirmed that aid was withheld from Ukraine in exchange for political favors at a White House press conference which was televised live, stunned reporters with the admission. Various members of the press even gave Mulvaney an opportunity at the time to walk back these comments, asking multiple times for clarification, leading Mulvaney to double down on the shocking admission of guilt. He then told reporters to “get over it,” adding that “there’s going to be political influence in foreign policy.” 

Though Mulvaney asserted at the time that there was nothing improper about this exchange, the White House legal counsel wasted no time in distancing themselves from Mulvaney, saying “the president’s legal counsel was not involved in acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney’s press briefing.” Later that day, Mulvaney attempted to reverse his claim, accusing the press of “misconstruing” his comments and saying “let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo,” directly contradicting his statement earlier that day.

Embed from Getty Images

This latest development is yet another blow to a White House reeling from the consequences of the ongoing impeachment investigation. At the same time as Mulvaney’s press conference, Gordan Sondland, the US Ambassador to the European Union, testified behind closed doors that he had agreed to allow Trump to run Ukraine policy through his personal lawyer, Rudy Guiliani, instead of through ordinary diplomatic channels. 

Additionally, Sondland confirmed that he had told another diplomat that there “was no quid pro quo” at the direction of the President, which Democrats argue indicates the presence of a consciousness of guilt as members of the Trump administration attempted to cover their tracks. Also, energy secretary Rick Perry, who is implicated in the wide-reaching political scandal, announced his resignation, becoming the latest in a series of departures in a White House with a historically high rate of turnover.

White House

Trump Administration Refuses to Participate in Impeachment Inquiry

/in , /by

On Tuesday, the White House announced that it would not cooperate whatsoever with an impeachment inquiry started by House of Representatives Democrats who are looking into whether the President is seeking to undermine the integrity of the 2020 election by soliciting campaign assistance from foreign powers. Although the Constitution grants the House of Representatives the power to bring forth articles of impeachment, and to issue subpoenas and compel witnesses to testify in order to do so, the Trump Administration has introduced the novel argument that Congress’s impeachment inquiry is illegitimate, and therefore the White House has no obligation to produce documents or allow witnesses to testify. 

Following along those lines, the White House blocked a key witness, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, from being deposed, though Sondland expressed a clear interest in speaking with members of Congress. Representative Adam Schiff, one of the House committee chairmen leading the impeachment inquiry, has previously stated that any action taken by the White House to delay its inquiry would be interpreted as obstruction of justice, the basis of which one of the articles of impeachment against Nixon was formed.

Embed from Getty Images

The White House made this argument in the form of a scathing letter addressed to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in which White House counsel Pat Cipollone asserted the impeachment effort is nothing more than a partisan attack on the executive branch of government, motivated by Democrats wishing to undo the results of the 2016 election. The letter also asserts that the inquiry is unconstitutional and illegal, and represents a violation of civil liberties and the principle of separation of powers. The letter is a clear attempt by the administration to slow down the impeachment inquiry process, in the hopes that it becomes a long, drawn-out affair that ultimately hurts the Democratic Party’s favorability. 

Democrats have responded by asserting that the letter’s criticisms of the inquiry are baseless and won’t hold up in court, and have indicated that they plan to follow through on their threat to include obstruction of justice charges among their articles of impeachment and that the administration’s refusal to cooperate would not slow down the pace of the inquiry, particularly considering the fact that damning evidence suggesting the President’s request of a foreign nation to interfere in the election is already publicly available.

Embed from Getty Images

The Trump campaign is already trying to take advantage of the impeachment inquiry in their re-election efforts by asserting in campaign advertisements that Trump is a victim of a partisan attack by Democrats intending to undermine his legitimacy as President. The longer the impeachment inquiry plays out, the more the campaign will be able to send this message, making the strategy of delaying the investigation as much as possible more fruitful. The Trump campaign has already raised a tremendous amount of money, totalling more than $300 million this year alone, meaning that the campaign will be able to send a message of victimhood broadly using social media and other outlets for as long as necessary.

The White House’s strategy is risky, especially considering the fragile legal ground its argument stands on. A clear majority of the US population supports the impeachment inquiry, even in these early stages of the investigation, with one poll indicating that 58% of Americans support impeaching Trump. The administration’s outright refusal to participate in the inquiry is likely to drive this number even higher, as an unwillingness to testify and produce evidence suggests the presence of a consciousness of guilt, and many Americans recognize obstruction of justice as an impeachable offense. Several commentators have characterized the administration’s response as a constitutional crisis, defined as a conflict between the branches of government that the Constitution has no mechanism to resolve, which is a breakdown of the fundamental structure of government. We are certainly in uncharted waters, as this is only the fourth impeachment inquiry in American history, and the first one in which both opposing sides are totally unwilling to cede any ground in the conflict. 

Impeachment

How the World is Reacting to US Impeachment Inquiry

/in , /by

On Tuesday, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi announced that the House would be opening an impeachment inquiry after a whistleblower’s complaint, which alleged that the President had attempted to court the assistance of a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 presidential election, was confirmed by the White House when it released a memorialization of a phone call with the president of Ukraine. President Trump is now the fourth-ever president to have faced an impeachment investigation, and the first to have been accused by Congress of conspiring with a foreign government to undermine American democracy. Given the historic nature of the occasion, Pelosi’s announcement made headlines not just in the US but around the world, inspiring a range of reactions in essentially every nation on the planet. Because of the significance of the United States in shaping global politics, other nations are keenly interested in how American politics plays out, and this interest has perhaps never been as intense as it is in the present moment.

According to CNN, most envoys and diplomats are concerned by the recent developments in the United States, but have also grown used to the chaos that has unfolded in Washington DC on a near-daily basis. Over the past two years, the US has fallen from being a leading voice on the world stage to being one that offers a vacuum of leadership, as President Trump has failed to impress upon other world leaders and has not been successful in negotiations with countries like Mexico, Iran, North Korea, and China. While many government officials around the world were expecting the president’s time to be largely occupied with re-election concerns heading into 2020, recent developments in Congress lead them to believe Trump will have even less interest in foreign affairs. Many around the world are skeptical that impeachment will result in Trump’s removal from office, and even believe that impeachment will help Trump’s re-election campaign, as it allows the president to continue to portray himself as the victim, a strategy that has worked well for him in the past.

Embed from Getty Images

Much attention has been focused on the fact that Trump unilaterally decided to declassify a memo describing his conversation with the leader of another country, which has led to concern about the secrecy of phone calls with the president. For instance, Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov has condemned the president for making the phone call public, and Russia warned the US that there would be negative repercussions if Trump released conversations between the White House and the Kremlin. (According to reports from several news outlets, details about Trump’s incriminating phone call with Ukraine were initially quarantined in a highly classified computer system designed for protecting state secrets, as were conversations involving Saudi Arabia and Putin.) Officials of foreign governments worry that they will not be able to have private conversations with the United States, as Trump’s declassification of details of the Ukraine call establishes a precedent that the White House may arbitrarily decide to release details involving conduct with other countries.

Though many officials predict the White House will be less involved with international affairs as a result of the impeachment proceedings, not every official considers this to be negative. Officials from around the world have long been concerned about the effects of Trump’s haphazard decisions when dealing with other countries, such as his glorification of North Korea, his withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords, his cancellation of the Iran nuclear deal, and his expensive trade war with China, and sometimes view Trump’s presence in global affairs as a nuisance rather than as an asset. While some are concerned that Trump may pursue war as a distraction from impeachment proceedings, most view this as unlikely, and instead are concerned about the potential impact on global markets. A number of officials who spoke with CNN marvelled at how quickly and how far political discourse in the US has fallen, and Gerard Araud, a former French ambassador to the US, characterized Trump’s conversation with the Ukranian president as “appalling.” 

Impeachment 2

Formal Impeachment Announcement Largely Symbolic, but Captures Nation’s Attention

/in , /by

In the past several days, news emerged that a whistleblower from the federal government observed disconcerting behavior from the President, who reported this news to the Director of National Intelligence, who considered the complaint to be urgent and serious. The Director of National Intelligence, by law, was supposed to hand over this information to Congress, but was blocked from doing so by the White House. As such, the full content of the complaint is currently unknown to Congress and to the American people, but what has become known is deeply troubling to lawmakers, including Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who yesterday publicly announced that Congress would be holding impeachment inquiries and investigations.

Less than a day after reports of the existence and circumstances of the complaint emerged, sources spoke to the Washington Post to reveal some, but crucially not all, of the details. According to several news outlets, in July President Trump had a phone call with the newly-elected president of Ukraine during which he asked the Ukrainian government to investigate unfounded claims concerning political corruption of the son of Joe Biden, whom Trump considers his main political opponent. While doing so, Trump had also taken the highly unusual step of withholding aid funds from Ukraine, suggesting the possibility of a quid-pro-quo of restoration of funds in exchange for “dirt” on Joe Biden. Yesterday, Trump admitted to reporters while standing next to Air Force One that he had spoken with the President of Ukraine and discussed Joe Biden and corruption concerns, but downplayed the seriousness of his conduct, describing the call as “largely congratulatory” and “perfect.”

Embed from Getty Images

Despite the President’s comments, however, many Democratic lawmakers, particularly those who have backgrounds in national security and the military, considered these allegations to be an unprecedented breach of a President’s constitutional responsibility, as asking a foreign power for help in winning a domestic re-election campaign threatens to undermine the system of democratic governance around which American political life is built. If left unchecked, this conduct could set a precedent that enables presidents to engage in unconstitutional conduct with impunity, fatally threatening the security of the country. As such, Nancy Pelosi yesterday publicly announced the beginning of formal impeachment proceedings in Congress, a risky political move considering the fact that the Senate is controlled by Republicans who are unlikely to convict the President and remove him from office, which could be seen as an embarrassing defeat for the Democrats and vindication for the Republican party. Following the announcement, several dozen Democratic congresspeople proclaimed their support for impeachment, bringing the number of House Democrats favoring impeachment past 200, close to the 218 representatives necessary for an impeachment vote to pass in the House.

According to reports from various news outlets, yesterday Trump called Pelosi in advance of her announcement, asking whether they could work out a deal concerning the whistleblower complaint, to which Pelosi replied he could authorize the release of the complaint to Congress as is required by law. Reportedly, Trump was surprised by Pelosi’s announcement, and took to Twitter to complain about it, even as he attends a U.N. summit. In response to the growing calls for his impeachment, Trump announced he would release the transcript of his call with the Ukranian President, claiming that it would exonerate him, and did so today. Democrats, who insist upon receiving the entire complaint and not just the transcript of the call, were expecting this transcript to be unremarkable, edited heavily or perhaps even falsified to create the impression that there was no wrongdoing. However, the transcript clearly shows Trump asking for an investigation into Joe Biden, as he said “there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, … whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.” While it is not the full complaint that Democrats are demanding, the transcript is surprisingly damning for the President, suggesting he perhaps does not recognize the extent and nature of the crime he just presented evidence of himself committing. Though the transcript shows no direct evidence of a quid pro quo arrangement, as Republican lawmakers were quick to point out, such an arrangement is irrelevant to the charge of asking a foreign power for assistance winning an election.

Embed from Getty Images

Despite the groundbreaking and unprecedented news, however, little is likely to change in the immediate term. This is because several investigations into the President’s conduct, including his connections with other governments and his finances, are already ongoing in the House, but the word “impeachment” had not been used to describe these investigations until now. And even if the House does vote for impeachment, which is growing ever more likely by the day, the President is only removed from office after a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate. However, recent developments expand the scale of the already-quite-serious allegations of misconduct by the President, as this is the first time Trump has been known to proactively seek assistance from a foreign power to improve his re-election odds, whereas previously he had only expressed an openness to the idea.

The times have found us

That being said, this is an undoubtedly tumultuous period in American history, as the political establishment is dealing with issues for which there exist no precedent and for which the outcome is difficult to predict. Nevertheless, the President’s conduct serves as a vital test of our country’s system of checks and balances, a self-correcting mechanism established deep within the core of the philosophy constructing this country’s politics. This system, comprised of three independent and co-equal branches of government, is designed to withstand and undo bouts of corruption and other internal threats to democracy, but only functions by the action of elected officials. In her announcement yesterday, Nancy Pelosi reiterated a phrase used by the country’s founders, proclaiming “the times have found us.” Indeed, the circumstances influencing political corruption have called upon elected officials to act in service of restoring the soul of the country, or witness the gradual undermining of the country’s founding principles and the dissolution of the rule of law and the rights of citizens.