Impeachment Moves Down The Road From Intel To Judiciary

Last night the House Intelligence Committee voted to officially issue the The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report to the public. All 13 Democrats on the Committee voted to issue it and all 9 Republicans voted against issuing it. In a statement, Adam Schiff and the chairs of the Foreign Affairs and Oversight Committees, Eliot Engel and Carolyn Maloney, said that "The evidence is clear that President Trump used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into announcing investigations into his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, and a debunked conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 election. These investigations were designed to benefit his 2020 presidential reelection campaign. The evidence is also clear that President Trump conditioned official acts on the public announcement of these investigations: a coveted White House visit and critical U.S. military assistance Ukraine needed to fight its Russian adversary. Finally, the evidence is clear that after his scheme to secure foreign help in his reelection was uncovered, President Trump engaged in categorical and unprecedented obstruction in order to cover-up his misconduct."

Schiff and his colleagues also charged that Trump's "actions have damaged our national security, undermined the integrity of the next election, and violated his oath of office. They have also challenged the very core of our Constitutional system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and rule of law. It will be up to the Congress to determine whether these acts rise to the level of an impeachable offense, whether the President shall be held to account, and whether we as a nation are committed to the rule of law-- or, instead, whether a president who uses the power of his office to coerce foreign interference in a U.S. election is something that Americans must simply 'get over.' With the release of our report, the American people can review for themselves the evidence detailing President Trump’s betrayal of the public trust."

The Intel Committee's inquiry uncovered a months-long effort by Trump "to use the powers of his office to solicit foreign interference on his behalf in the 2020 election. "Trump's scheme subverted U.S. foreign policy toward Ukraine and undermined our national security in favor of two politically motivated investigations that would help his presidential reelection campaign. The President demanded that the newly-elected Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, publicly announce investigations into a political rival that he apparently feared the most, former Vice President Joe Biden, and into a discredited theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 presidential election. To compel the Ukrainian President to do his political bidding, President Trump conditioned two official acts on the public announcement of the investigations:  a coveted White House visit and critical U.S. military assistance Ukraine needed to fight its Russian adversary.You can read the whole report here. Below are excerpts from the executive summary:

During a July 25, 2019, call between President Trump and President Zelensky, President Zelensky expressed gratitude for U.S. military assistance. President Trump immediately responded by asking President Zelensky to “do us a favor though” and openly pressed for Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Biden and the 2016 conspiracy theory. In turn, President Zelensky assured President Trump that he would pursue the investigation and reiterated his interest in the White House meeting. Although President Trump’s scheme intentionally bypassed many career personnel, it was undertaken with the knowledge and approval of senior Administration officials, including the President’s Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Secretary of Energy Rick Perry. In fact, at a press conference weeks after public revelations about the scheme, Mr. Mulvaney publicly acknowledged that the President directly tied the hold on military aid to his desire to get Ukraine to conduct a political investigation, telling Americans to “get over it.”

President Trump and his senior officials may see nothing wrong with using the power of the Office of the President to pressure a foreign country to help the President’s reelection campaign. Indeed, President Trump continues to encourage Ukraine and other foreign countries to engage in the same kind of election interference today. However, the Founding Fathers prescribed a remedy for a chief executive who places his personal interests above those of the country:  impeachment. Accordingly, as part of the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, in coordination with the Committees on Oversight and Reform and Foreign Affairs, were compelled to undertake a serious, sober, and expeditious investigation into whether the President’s misconduct warrants that remedy.

In response, President Trump engaged in an unprecedented campaign of obstruction of this impeachment inquiry. Nevertheless, due in large measure to patriotic and courageous public servants who provided the Committees with direct evidence of the President’s actions, the Committees uncovered significant misconduct on the part of the President of the United States. As required under House Resolution 660, the Intelligence Committee, in consultation with the Committees on Oversight and Reform and Foreign Affairs, has prepared this report to detail the evidence uncovered to date, which will now be transmitted to the Judiciary Committee for its consideration.

Based on witness testimony and evidence collected during the impeachment inquiry, the Committees released the following findings:

I.               Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States-- acting personally and through his agents within and outside of the U.S. government-- solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The President engaged in this course of conduct for the benefit of his reelection, to harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and to influence our nation’s upcoming presidential election to his advantage. In so doing, the President placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the U.S. presidential election process, and endangered U.S. national security.

II.             In furtherance of this scheme, President Trump-- directly and acting through his agents within and outside the U.S. government-- sought to pressure and induce Ukraine’s newly-elected president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to publicly announce unfounded investigations that would benefit President Trump’s personal political interests and reelection effort. To advance his personal political objectives, President Trump encouraged the President of Ukraine to work with his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani.

III.           As part of this scheme, President Trump, acting in his official capacity and using his position of public trust, personally and directly requested from the President of Ukraine that the government of Ukraine publicly announce investigations into (1) the President’s political opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and his son, Hunter Biden, and (2) a baseless theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine-- rather than Russia-- interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. These investigations were intended to harm a potential political opponent of President Trump and benefit the President’s domestic political standing.

IV.           President Trump ordered the suspension of $391 million in vital military assistance urgently needed by Ukraine, a strategic partner, to resist Russian aggression. Because the aid was appropriated by Congress, on a bipartisan basis, and signed into law by the President, its expenditure was required by law. Acting directly and through his subordinates within the U.S. government, the President withheld from Ukraine this military assistance without any legitimate foreign policy, national security, or anti-corruption justification.The President did so despite the longstanding bipartisan support of Congress, uniform support across federal departments and agencies for the provision to Ukraine of the military assistance, and his obligations under the Impoundment Control Act.

V.             President Trump used the power of the Office of the President and exercised his authority over the Executive Branch, including his control of the instruments of the federal government, to apply increasing pressure on the President of Ukraine and the Ukrainian government to announce the politically-motivated investigations desired by President Trump.  Specifically, to advance and promote his scheme, the President withheld official acts of value to Ukraine and conditioned their fulfillment on actions by Ukraine that would benefit his personal political interests:   

A- President Trump-- acting through agents within and outside the U.S. government-- conditioned a head of state meeting at the White House, which the President of Ukraine desperately sought to demonstrate continued United States support for Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression, on Ukraine publicly announcing the investigations that President Trump believed would aid his reelection campaign.

B- To increase leverage over the President of Ukraine, President Trump, acting through his agents and subordinates, conditioned release of the vital military assistance he had suspended to Ukraine on the President of Ukraine’s public announcement of the investigations that President Trump sought.

C- President Trump’s closest subordinates and advisors within the Executive Branch, including Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Energy J. Richard Perry, and other senior White House and Executive Branch officials had knowledge of, in some cases facilitated and furthered the President’s scheme, and withheld information about the scheme from the Congress and the American public.   

VI.           In directing and orchestrating this scheme to advance his personal political interests, President Trump did not implement, promote, or advance U.S. anti-corruption policies. In fact, the President sought to pressure and induce the government of Ukraine to announce politically-motivated investigations lacking legitimate predication that the U.S. government otherwise discourages and opposes as a matter of policy in that country and around the world.  In so doing, the President undermined U.S. policy supporting anti-corruption reform and the rule of law in Ukraine, and undermined U.S. national security.

VII.         By withholding vital military assistance and diplomatic support from a strategic foreign partner government engaged in an ongoing military conflict illegally instigated by Russia, President Trump compromised national security to advance his personal political interests.

VIII.       Faced with the revelation of his actions, President Trump publicly and repeatedly persisted in urging foreign governments, including Ukraine and China, to investigate his political opponent. This continued solicitation of foreign interference in a U.S. election presents a clear and present danger that the President will continue to use the power of his office for his personal political gain.

IX.           Using the power of the Office of the President, and exercising his authority over the Executive Branch, President Trump ordered and implemented a campaign to conceal his conduct from the public and frustrate and obstruct the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry by:

A- refusing to produce to the impeachment inquiry’s investigating Committees information and records in the possession of the White House, in defiance of a lawful subpoena;

B- directing Executive Branch agencies to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of all documents and records from the investigating Committees;

C- directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees, including in defiance of lawful subpoenas for testimony; and

D- intimidating, threatening, and tampering with prospective and actual witnesses in the impeachment inquiry in an effort to prevent, delay, or influence the testimony of those witnesses.

In so doing, and despite the fact that the Constitution vests in the House of Representatives the “sole Power of Impeachment,” the President sought to arrogate to himself the right to determine the propriety, scope, and nature of an impeachment inquiry into his own misconduct, and the right to deny any and all information to the Congress in the conduct of its constitutional responsibilities.

Crooked Central Valley Congressman Devin Nunes, who thinks he's suing CNN for $435 million over false and defamatory reporting, is in big trouble himself. Abigail Tracy of Vanity Fair wrote that "When it was first reported that Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas was willing to testify to Congress that Devin Nunes had actively participated in the effort to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and smear an American diplomat, the California Republican dismissed the stories as 'fake' and 'demonstrably false.' But he didn’t deny the allegations themselves. Instead, he dodged. 'I really want to answer all of these questions,' Nunes, who is, remarkably, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox News host Maria Baritomo, before decidedly not answering questions about his involvement in the Ukraine scandal engulfing Donald Trump and the White House. And now, it appears Nunes has even more explaining to do... The [phone] records-- which AT&T provided to the committee-- suggest Nunes was actively involved in the smear campaign against Marie Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine. As the effort to oust the veteran diplomat gained momentum after John Solomon, a former opinion contributor to The Hill, published a series of unfounded allegations about her and the Bidens, Nunes was in contact with a number of key figures. The phone records, according to the report, reveal five phone calls on April 10 between Nunes and Giuliani, who was actively promoting Solomon’s articles on social media and in conservative media. Nunes also had multiple contacts with Parnas, who like Giuliani was pushing the false allegations against Yovanovitch and the Bidens. Nunes and Parnas exchanged four calls ranging in duration from zero seconds to almost nine minutes on April 12. That same day, Parnas was also in touch with Solomon, Giuliani, and Victoria Toensing, a frequent Fox News guest. (On the same day, former Ukrainian prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko hired Toensing as his lawyer.) Additionally on April 12, Giuliani was in contact with the White House, the Office of Management and Budget, and Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for President Trump."

Like everyone looking at the report, Tracy believes that "Given Tuesday’s revelations, it’s hard to imagine a scenario in which Nunes can dodge another ethics investigation, especially considering that some Democrats had floated the idea even before the report was published. 'It is deeply concerning that at a time when the president of the United States was using the power of his office to dig up dirt on a political rival, that there may be evidence that there were members of Congress complicit in that activity,' Adam Schiff, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday."





UPDATE: GUILTY

This morning constitutional scholars called by Democrats testified that Trump’s conduct toward Ukraine rises to the level of impeachment. Meanwhile, in London, Señor Trumpanzee, after a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, told reporters that "The word 'impeachment' is a dirty word that should only be used in special occasions." He claims "everybody" is saying the Intel Committee report is "a joke." But at the NATO summit, Trump is a joke, being laughed at my all his peers-- and so much so that President Snowflake announced he's leaving early and that Justin Trudeau is "two-faced" for making fun of him.