Democrats' debate erupts as candidates spar over donors; Yang slams Trump 'obsession'

Long-simmering tensions boiled over at Thursday night's 2020 Democratic presidential primary debate in Los Angeles, as a blunt one-on-one sparring match erupted between Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren over their fundraising -- just minutes after businessman Andrew Yang slammed Democrats' "obsession" with President Trump and impeachment.
Warren, a U.S. senator from Massachusetts, began the fiery exchange by criticizing Buttigieg's recent lavish fundraiser in Napa, Calif., saying he was cavorting with "billionaires in wine caves" -- prompting Buttigieg to retort that Warren, a multimillionaire, was a populist in name only.
"You know, according to Forbes magazine, I'm literally the only person on this stage who is not a millionaire or billionaire," Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., said. "This is the problem with issuing purity tests you yourself cannot pass."
BIDEN SAYS 'YES' WHEN ASKED ABOUT SACRIFICING BLUE-COLLAR JOBS FOR CLEAN ENERGY
Democrats, Buttigieg argued, are "in the fight" of their "lives," and need all the support they can get -- whether from the wealthy or otherwise. He added that he'd gladly accept a donation from Warren if she were to offer one.
"We shouldn't try to [defeat Trump] with one hand tied behind our back," Buttigieg said.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., then dismissively referred to Butitigeg as an "energetic guy," sarcastically saying he could "take on" former Vice President Joe Biden's corporate connections as the two secretly courted big-money donors, drawing jeers. Sanders noted that Biden has 44 billionaire contributors, while Buttigieg was "trailing" with only 39.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota then interjected: "I did not come here to listen to this argument. ... I have never even been to a wine cave."

"I did not come here to listen to this argument. ... I have never even been to a wine cave."
— Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.

She went on to say she wanted the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision overturned by constitutional amendment. The 2010 decision declared unconstitutional the federal regulation of campaign expenditures by corporations and unions in connection with campaigns.
It was just one of several Klobuchar moments during the debate that resonated in the debate hall at Loyola Marymount University -- even as conservative commentators winced.
"The 'moderate' Klobuchar just advocated for a constitutional amendment that would give government control over free political speech," the Wall Street Journal's Kimberly Strassel wrote on Twitter. "This is 'moderation' in today's Democratic Party."
Separately, Klobuchar unloaded on Buttigieg, after he remarked: "If you want to talk about the capacity to win, try putting together a coalition to bring you back to office with 80 percent of the vote as a gay dude in Mike Pence's Indiana."
Klobuchar shot back: “If you had won in Indiana, that would be one thing. You tried and you lost by 20 points.” That was an unsparing reference to Buttigieg's failed bid to become Indiana state treasurer.
She also remarked, "When we were in the last debate, mayor, you basically mocked the 100 years of experience on the stage. ... You should respect our experience."
The spat over fundraising erupted shortly after Yang threw cold water on the media's "obsession" with impeachment, saying Americans become frustrated "the more we act like Donald Trump is the cause of all our problems."

Iowa caucuses near

It was a heated beginning to a wide-ranging debate with less than seven weeks to go until Iowa’s caucuses kick off, and just a day after House Democrats voted to impeach Trump. The winnowed field of seven Democratic presidential contenders was on the debate stage for a sixth and final time in 2019.
"If you turned on cable network news today, you would think [Trump's] our president because of some combination of Russia, racism, Facebook, Hillary Clinton and emails all mixed together," Yang said. "But Americans around the country know different. We blasted away 4 million manufacturing jobs that were primarily based in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Missouri."
He added, to applause: "What we have to do, is we have to stop being obsessed over impeachment ... and start actually digging in and solving the problems that got Donald Trump elected in the first place."

"What we have to do, is we have to stop being obsessed over impeachment ... and start actually digging in and solving the problems that got Donald Trump elected in the first place." 
— Andrew Yang

(At the end of the debate, Yang sounded a note of self-deprecation: "I know what you're thinking, America. How am I still on the stage with them?")
But, other Democrats largely echoed their previous attacks on the president's dealings with Ukraine, and his assertions of executive privilege to block administration officials from testifying.
“The president is not king in America,” said Klobuchar, who is preparing to serve as a juror as Trump's impeachment shifts from the House to a Senate trial. Alluding to President Richard Nixon, she added, "If the president claims that he is so innocent, then why doesn't he have all the president's men testify?"
MCCONNELL HEADS BACK TO SENATE FLOOR LATE THURSDAY, SAYS DEMS BREAKING PRECEDENT, NOT SURE WHAT THEY'RE DOING
Klobuchar went on to call Trump's actions a "global Watergate." Democrats' inference that Trump is guilty because he does not voluntarily permit his deputies to testify has rankled Republicans, who assert the importance of the presumption of innocence.
Biden then knocked Trump's argument that less than half of Americans support his removal from office.
“He's dumbing down the presidency beyond what I even thought he would do,” Biden said. “We need to restore the integrity of the presidency.”

Democratic presidential candidates from left, entrepreneur Andrew Yang, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and businessman Tom Steyer stand on stage during a Democratic presidential primary debate Thursday, Dec. 19, 2019, in Los Angeles. (Associated Press)

Later, Democrats largely defended Trump's breakthrough U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which the House passed hours earlier.
However, candidates railed against Trump's economy, despite multiple indicators that the economy is doing well. The U.S. unemployment rate stands at a half-century low of 3.5 percent, backed by consistently strong job gains in recent months that have largely squelched fears of a recession that had taken hold over the summer.
“This economy is not working for most of us," Buttigieg said.
"The middle class is getting killed,” Biden added. He said the economy was not "on kilter."
In response to a question as to whether he would commit to running for a second term if elected, amid a Politico report that he has privately said he would retire after four years in the White House, the 77-year-old Biden announced that he would not -- saying his focus is on winning a first term.
When a moderator told the 70-year-old Warren she would be the oldest president ever elected upon her inauguration, she retorted that she would also be the youngest woman ever elected to the presidency, drawing applause.
Thursday night's televised contest, sponsored by PBS NewsHour and Politico, brought seven rivals to heavily Democratic California, the biggest prize in the primary season and home to 1 in 8 Americans.

Declining viewership

The debate could turn out to be the least-watched so far, as the holidays approach and impeachment drama dominates the news. Viewership has declined in each round though five debates, and even campaigns have grumbled that the candidates would rather be on the ground in early voting states than again taking the debate stage.
Republicans have slammed House Democrats' plan to delay a Senate trial. Hours before the debate, Noah Feldman, the Harvard Law School professor who testified for Democrats at the impeachment inquiry earlier this month, wrote an explosive op-ed asserting that if Democrats do not forward the impeachment articles to the Senate as dictated by the Constitution, then Trump was never even impeached at all. The Constitution dictates that after impeachment by a majority in the House, a two-thirds vote is needed in the Senate to remove a president from office.
Asked why polls show that many Americans oppose impeaching and removing Trump, Biden called impeachment a "constitutional necessity," regardless of what the numbers show.
Warren, for her part, accused Trump of corruption, without addressing the popularity of impeachment.
Klobuchar also suggested that the U.S. would "probably" need to relocate Americans away from places impacted by climate change, including possibly Miami.
Yang, meanwhile, advanced the idea of using thorium to help address the nation's energy needs.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., right, speaks as South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg listens during a Democratic presidential primary debate Thursday, Dec. 19, 2019, in Los Angeles. (Associated Press)

No clear front-runner

The lack of a clear front-runner in the Democratic field came as Democrats complained that there would be a notable lack of diversity onstage Thursday as compared to earlier debates. For the first time this cycle, the debate didn't feature a black or Latino candidate.
The race in California has largely mirrored national trends, with Biden, Sanders and Warren clustered at the top of the field, followed by Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Yang and billionaire philanthropist Tom Steyer.
Conspicuously missing from Thursday's lineup was former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire who is unable to qualify for the contests because he is not accepting campaign donations. But even if he's not on the podium, Bloomberg has been felt in the state: He's running a deluge of TV advertising in California to introduce himself to voters who probably know little, if anything, about him.
Bloomberg's late entry into the contest last month highlighted the overriding issue in the contest -- electability, a sign of the unease within the Democratic Party about its crop of candidates and whether any is strong enough to unseat an incumbent president. The eventual nominee will be tasked with splicing together the party's disparate factions — a job Hillary Clinton struggled with after defeating Sanders in a long and bitter primary fight in 2016.
DEBATE IS ON: DEAL REACHED IN UNION DISPUTE THAT THREATENED TO SIDETRACK SHOWDOWN
Biden adviser Symone Sanders said to expect another robust exchange on health care.
“This is an issue that is not going away and for good reason, because it is an issue that in 2018 Democrats ran on and won," she said.
Jess O'Connell with Buttigieg's campaign said the candidate will “be fully prepared to have an open and honest conversation about where there are contrasts between us and the other candidates. This is a really important time to start to do that. Voters need time to understand the distinctions between these candidates.” The key issues: health care and higher education.
The unsettled race has seen surges at various points by Biden, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg, though it's become defined by that cluster of shifting leaders, with others struggling for momentum. Sen. Kamala Harris of California, once seen as among the top tier of candidates, shelved her campaign this month, citing a lack of money. And Warren has become more aggressive, especially toward Buttigieg, as she tries to recover from shifting explanations of how she’d pay for “Medicare for All” without raising taxes.
In a replay of 2016, the shifting race for the Democratic nomination has showcased the rift between the party's liberal wing, represented by Sanders and Warren, and candidates parked in or near the political center, including Biden, Buttigieg and Bloomberg.
Two candidates who didn’t make the stage will still make their presence felt for debate watchers with ads reminding viewers they’re still in the race.
APPELLATE COURT DEMANDS HOUSE DEMS EXPLAIN WHETHER IMPEACHMENT VOTE RENDERS THEIR LEGAL CASE 'MOOT'
Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and former Housing Secretary Julián Castro aired television ads targeted to primary voters during the debate. Booker’s was his first television ad, and in it he said even though he wasn't on the debate stage, “I’m going to win this election anyway.” It aired as part of a $500,000 campaign, running in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, as well as New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.
A pro-Booker super PAC is also going up with an ad in Iowa highlighting positive reviews of Booker’s past debate performances.
Meanwhile, Castro is running an ad, in Iowa, in which he argues the state should no longer go first in Democrats’ nominating process because it doesn’t reflect the diversity of the Democratic Party.
Both candidates failed to hit the polling threshold to qualify for the debates and have in recent weeks become outspoken critics of what they say is a debate qualification process that favors white candidates over minorities.
Fox News' Paul Steinhauser and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

McConnell: 'Impasse' over Trump impeachment trial, as Dems depart from precedent

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., incredulously returned to the Senate floor late Thursday to declare that the Senate and House Democrats were at an "impasse" over whether the House would transmit its articles of impeachment against President Trump to the GOP-controlled Senate for a constitutionally mandated trial.
McConnell, speaking after a meeting with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the top Democrat had insisted on "departing from the unanimous bipartisan precedent that 100 senators approved before the beginning of President [Bill] Clinton's trial" concerning logistics.
The back-and-forth rhetoric comes as Noah Feldman, the Harvard Law School professor who testified for Democrats at the impeachment inquiry earlier this month, wrote an explosive op-ed asserting that if Democrats do not forward the impeachment articles to the Senate as dictated by the Constitution, then Trump was never even impeached at all. The Constitution dictates that after impeachment by a majority in the House, a two-thirds vote is needed in the Senate to remove a president from office.
Feldman cautioned that impeachment "means the House sending its approved articles of impeachment to the Senate, with House managers standing up in the Senate and saying the president is impeached."
Therefore, "if the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president," Feldman said. "If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn’t truly impeached at all."
(Pursuant to House procedures, a president impeached by the House in one Congress can be tried by a Senate in the next Congress, but impeachment managers would need to be re-appointed by the new House.)
Schumer had requested a "special pre-trial guarantee of certain witnesses whom the House Democrats, themselves, did not bother to pursue as they assemble their case," McConnell said. He noted that in 1999, "all 100 senators endorsed a common-sense solution" to divide the process into two stages: one laying the groundwork for rules on matters such as opening statements, with another handling "mid-trial questions such as witnesses."
"Some House Democrats imply they are withholding the [impeachment] articles for some kind of leverage," McConnell said. "I admit, I'm not sure what leverage there is in refraining from sending us something we do not want. Alas, if they can figure that out, they can explain."
He continued: "Following weeks of pronouncements about the urgency of the situation, urgent situation, the prosecutors appear to have developed cold feet. Democrat prosecution seems to gotten cold feet, and to be unsure about whether they want to proceed to the trial, like I said, a very unusual spectacle. And in my view, certainly not one that reflects well on the House.
"So we'll see we'll see whether House Democrats ever want to work up the courage to actually take their accusation to trial," McConnell concluded, after slamming Democrats for advancing a "muddled" message on the topic. "Let me close with this, Mr. President. I am proud the Senate came together today to confirm more well-qualified nominees and pass major legislation for the American people."
For his part, Trump called for an immediate Senate trial: "So after the Democrats gave me no Due Process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial," he tweeted late Thursday. "Actually, they have zero proof of anything, they will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial!"
Earlier in the day, McConnell delivered a separate address, which Schumer bashed as a "30-minute partisan stem-winder."
"This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular president create a toxic new precedent that will echo well into the future,” McConnell said on the floor.
"Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?" Schumer asked. "If the House’s case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?"
Late Wednesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., floated the possibility that the House would not send the articles of impeachment to the Senate, where McConnell likely would oversee a strong defense of the president that could prove politically damaging for vulnerable Democrats.
"We’ll make a decision... as we go along." Pelosi told reporters, adding that "we'll see what the process will be on the Senate side."
On Thursday, Pelosi hastily shot down questions on impeachment and sending the articles to the Senate, prompting mockery from top GOP officials.
In 1998, after the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, the House sent the charges off to the Senate within minutes. This time around, the House may want to hold onto the articles as leverage to extract concessions from Senate Republicans -- or to bury impeachment, as it proves increasingly unpopular among moderates in key battleground states.

Illegals Driving Cartoons

New Jersey bill to let illegal immigrants get drivers' licenses advances to governor's desk

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, is expected to sign a bill into law that would allow illegal immigrants to obtain drivers’ licenses, according to reports.
The bill headed to the governor’s desk Monday after it was approved in separate votes in the New Jersey Assembly and Senate during the final legislative session of the year. Murphy has not said when he plans to sign the bill, but he had repeatedly asked the Democrat-led legislature to push it forward.
Immigrants who gathered in Trenton, the state capital, to support passage of the bill celebrated Monday at a local church, as seen in a video posted on Twitter by Cosecha Movement, an immigrant advocacy group.
Supporters argue the measure could increase safety because many immigrants without legal documentation already drive without licenses and insurance.
“The legislation advanced on the Assembly floor and by the Senate today is fair and responsible,” Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin, a Democrat, told The Wall Street Journal. “It brings us one step closer to ensuring all motor vehicles and drivers are insured, thereby creating safer roadways for all New Jersey residents.”
The legislation would give illegal immigrants over age 16 the "Green Light" to obtain driver's licenses and learners’ permits. Under the terms, foreign documents such as passports or a driver's license can be submitted and used in the application process. A Social Security number is not required.
Thirteen states, including Delaware and New York, and the District of Columbia permit immigrants without legal status to obtain drivers licenses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
The New Jersey bill also includes safeguards to protect the identities of illegal immigrants from federal agencies – something critics say will contribute to voter fraud and pose both a public safety and national security risk.
“How does giving illegal immigrants, who we know have already broken the law once, an official government document going to make us safer?” Assemblyman Ron Dancer, a Republican, told the Journal.

“How does giving illegal immigrants, who we know have already broken the law once, an official government document going to make us safer?”
— Assemblyman Ron Dancer, R-N.J.

Speaking on "Fox & Friends" Tuesday, Acting Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Chad Wolf said the legislation would restrict the agency’s access to Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) data in federal investigations.
"It's very similar to what we see with sanctuary policies around the country that, again, are not protecting the communities and the law enforcement officers trying to do their job[s]," Wolf said. “And, that's really concerning from a 'protecting the homeland' perspective."
The legislation sets up a two-tiered driver’s license system. One license would conform to federal REAL ID requirements that include proof of legal residency. Another license would permit people without a legal status to obtain a license.
Cosecha Movement celebrated the legislation’s passage in New Jersey following a two-year campaign to obtain the "right to drive without fear of ICE detention."
“This legislation means that I can take my kids to school, go to work and go to hospitals with peace of mind,” Caritina Hernandez, a Cosecha leader, told Insider NJ. “For many years, parents like me had to live our daily lives with fears that we would be unjustly pulled over, fined, given court dates or even worse, be separated from our families all because we are not allowed to drive legally in NJ – this ends today.”
The New Jersey bill was passed by the state legislature the same day New York's law permitting illegal immigrants to obtain drivers’ licenses took effect Monday. An inlfux of applicants flooded DMV offices across the state as immigrants -- with documents in hand -- suddenly became eligible to apply for licenses regardless of their U.S. citizenship status.
Fox News' Julia Musto, Fox Business' Audrey Conklin and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Jeff Van Drew ousted from Blue Dog Dems; gets office help from GOP after staffers quit

A group of centrist Democrats ejected Rep. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J., from its ranks Tuesday, voting to rescind his membership "indefinitely," as he is likely to switch over to the GOP, a senior aide to the Blue Dog Coalition told Fox News.
Van Drew's ousting from the coalition follows the resignations of five aides from Van Drew's office Sunday. They said they could no longer work for the congressman as he looks to make the jump across the aisle.
"Sadly, Congressman Van Drew's decision to join the ranks of the Republican Party led by Donald Trump does not align with the values we brought to this job when we joined his office," the aides wrote in a letter addressed to Van Drew's chief of staff, Allison Murphy.
The congressman told reporters Tuesday that the exodus of aides was dictated to them by nameless officials who threatened that they would never hold another position in the Democratic Party if they did not resign, according to Politico.
“They were told to,” Van Drew claimed, adding: “They had to or they wouldn’t work again.”
Van Drew didn't specify if he knew that any threats were made to the aides, but said “it would be very hard for them to work” if they stayed with him after he switched parties.

Deputy Chief of Staff Justin O'Leary, center, joins other top aides to New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew, a House Democrat who plans to switch and become a Republican, as leave their office after turning in their joint letter of resignation, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, Dec. 16, 2019. (Associated Press)

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, who reportedly has tried to convince Van Drew to join the GOP, said he has sent some of his staffers to assist Van Drew temporarily as he deals with the loss of personnel.
"We believe in helping people," McCarthy said, according to Roll Call.

The Blue Dog Coalition told Fox News on Tuesday that it ousted the congressman after reports he was considering switching political parties.
“Per our by laws, which require all members to be a member of the Democratic Party, Congressman Van Drew is no longer a member of the Blue Dog Coalition,” Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla., and co-chair of the Coalition, told Fox News.
Van Drew has been one of only two Democrats to vote against formalizing the impeachment inquiry against President Trump and has been an outspoken critic of the probe from the start. The House is expected to vote on two articles of impeachment on Wednesday.
The freshman represents a southern New Jersey district that Trump carried in 2016 and was expected to face a difficult reelection next year.
He has not formally announced that he is switching parties, but has instead said: "People kind of know that I'm going in a direction, but I haven’t announced anything."

New Mexico Democrat's DUI conviction could cost him panel chairmanship, state party leaders warn

A New Mexico state senator was reportedly convicted on misdemeanor aggravated drunken driving and reckless driving charges Tuesday -- nearly six months after he rear-ended a driver stopped at a red light in the state.
Sen. Richard Martinez, a Democrat, failed a field sobriety test and injured himself and the two people in the other car in the June crash. He also refused to take a breathalyzer test, The Albuquerque Journal reported.
ARIZONA LAWMAKER ARRESTED FOR DUI, REPORTEDLY TELLS OFFICER, 'YOU'LL GET YOURS'

New Mexico state Sen. Richard Martinez, a Democrat, refused to take a breathalyzer test after injuring himself and two people in another car in a June DUI crash, authorities say. (Española Police Department )

Martinez has served in the state’s Senate since 2001 and previously said he would not resign after his arrest. He pleaded not guilty to the charges.
After his conviction, top Democrats in the state said they would recommend asking him to leave as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, but Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth and Senate President Pro Tem Mary Kay Papen said they would let Martinez or voters decide his fate in the Senate. They said they would deliver their recommendation next month.
“The defendant made the choice to drink. Second, he made the choice to drive impaired. Third, the consequences,” Mark Probasco, a special prosecutor with the state attorney general’s office said, according to The Journal. “No one is above the law, not even a senator — not even this defendant."

"The defendant made the choice to drink. Second, he made the choice to drive impaired. Third, the consequences. No one is above the law, not even a senator — not even this defendant."
— Mark Probasco, special prosecutor with New Mexico state attorney general’s office

Martinez originally told officers he had only “a beer or two,” but later admitted he had multiple glasses of wine. His attorney claimed the crash was an accident and said he failed the sobriety test because he was dazed from hitting the windshield.
The officer who arrested Martinez said the senator was slurring his speech and had alcohol on his breath.
He faces up to 180 days in jail as he goes up for reelection next year.
A former Republican state senator in New Mexico was defeated last year after she was convicted for DUI in 2018, The Journal reported.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

With Trump impeachment vote imminent, president traveling to Battle Creek, Mich., to rally the faithful

President Trump on Wednesday will be far away from Capitol Hill -- and the Washington establishment he has long criticized as an irredeemable "swamp" -- as the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives prepares to impeach him in a likely party-line vote on charges of obstruction of Congress and abuse of power.
Instead, the president will be on friendly turf in downtown Battle Creek, Mich., hosting a rally that may rank among his most defiant -- a marked contrast from the approach of former President Bill Clinton, who mostly stayed under the radar during his own impeachment proceedings in 1998.
There will be unusually tight security near the Capitol building in Washington on Wednesday, Fox News was told, and some of those measures were visible Tuesday night. House Democrats will convene to adopt the rules for the impeachment debate shortly after 9 a.m. ET, followed by six hours of debate evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. Some members will be afforded only one minute to speak, and no amendments to the impeachment resolutions will be permitted.
The final vote sequence will likely begin well into the evening hours, with one vote held on each article of impeachment, Fox News was told.
The stage was set late Tuesday night by the House Rules Committee, which approved the procedures for Wednesday's impeachment proceedings in a 9-4 party-line vote after a marathon day of contentious hearings.
Wednesday "promises to be a long day," Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern, D-Mass., told reporters.
It will likely end with Trump becoming just the third U.S. president ever to be impeached -- a history-making development that Trump has said reflects far worse on congressional Democrats than it does on him.
In a blistering, no-holds-barred six-page letter Tuesday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Trump lambasted the Democrats' impeachment inquiry as an "open war on American Democracy," writing that Pelosi has violated her oath of office and "cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment!"
"Everyone, you included, knows what is really happening," Trump said. "Your chosen candidate lost the election in 2016, in an Electoral College landslide (306-227), and you and your party have never recovered from this defeat. So you have spent three straight years attempting to overturn the will of the American people and nullify their votes. You view democracy as your enemy!"
Conceding the House vote, Trump said he wanted to set his words down “for the purpose of history.”
"You are the ones interfering in America's elections," Trump wrote. "You are the ones subverting America's Democracy. You are the ones Obstructing Justice. You are the ones bringing pain and suffering to our Republic for your own selfish personal, political, and partisan gain."
READ IT: TRUMP LETTER SAYS DEMOCRATS WANTED IMPEACHMENT FOR YEARS, CAN'T HANDLE 2016 ELECTION LOSS

A letter from President Trump to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is seen Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2019, in Washington. (Associated Press)

Trump specifically hammered Pelosi for daring "to invoke the Founding Fathers in pursuit of this election-nullification scheme," and "even worse," for "offending Americans of faith by continually saying 'I pray for the President,' when you know this statement is not true, unless it is meant in a negative sense."
"It is a terrible thing you are doing," Trump added, "but you will have to live with it, not I!"
Concerning the obstruction-of-Congress impeachment count, Trump attacked Democrats for "trying to impeach the duly elected President of the United States for asserting Constitutionally based privileges that have been asserted on a bipartisan basis by administrations of both political parties throughout our nation's history."
And, regarding the abuse-of-power charge, Trump noted that it was former Vice President Joe Biden who had "bragged" on video about having Ukraine's allegedly corrupt prosecutor fired by threatening to withhold $1 billion in critical U.S. aid. But, House Republicans have been barred by Democrats from calling witnesses that would help them make the case that Trump's concerns about Ukraine corruption were legitimate.
"More due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch trials," Trump wrote, observing that even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly said at the United Nations that he felt no pressure from the White House to conduct political investigations in exchange for military aid.

"More due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch trials."
— President Trump, to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

The president argued that Democrats were trying to distract Americans from the strong economy and historically low unemployment numbers, and pointed out that Democrats have openly called for impeachment since the day he took office.
Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, Trump noted, announced that "We're going to impeach the motherf---er" all the way back in January -- long before Trump's mentioned Biden's possible corruption in a phone call with Zelensky.
Democrats' persistent but unsubstantiated allegations that the Trump campaign had conspired with Russians to influence the 2016 election, the president observed, ultimately "dissolved into dust," but not before the nation had to endure years of "turmoil and torment." (Also on Tuesday, in a highly unusual public statement, the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court slammed the FBI for its misleading warrant applications to surveil a former Trump aide during the Russia probe, and demanded immediate corrective action.)
But Pelosi, who warned earlier this year that impeachment would need to be bipartisan, called Trump's letter "ridiculous." She reaffirmed that Democrats would go ahead with impeachment, even though they lack any Republican support in the House.
“Very sadly, the facts have made clear that the President abused his power for his own personal, political benefit and that he obstructed Congress,” Pelosi wrote to colleagues. “In America, no one is above the law.”
One by one this week, centrist Democratic lawmakers, including many first-term freshmen who built the House majority and could risk their reelection in districts where the president is popular, announced they would follow Pelosi's lead and vote to impeach.
Polls have shown that Trump is now leading his top Democratic rivals, and that impeachment is actually helping Trump in key battleground states that might decide the 2020 election.
Nationally, a Fox News poll this week found that 50 percent of respondents want Trump impeached and removed from office, even as Trump's job approval ticked up.
Voters in swing districts have increasingly voiced their frustrations at heated town halls as their representatives have said they will support impeachment. Rep. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., who represents a district Trump won in 2016, pointedly ignored protesters as she backed impeachment at an event this week.
For her part, Rep. Abby Finkenauer, D-Iowa, referred to the oath she took in January as she was sworn into office as guiding her decision. She announced support for both articles of impeachment to “honor my duty to defend our Constitution and democracy from abuse of power at the highest levels.”
One new Democratic congressman, Jared Golden of Maine, said he would vote to impeach on abuse of power but not obstruction, in an apparent effort to appease both sides on the issue.
And a freshman Democrat, Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, is indicating he will switch parties to become a Republican after opposing impeachment. Earlier this year, Michigan conservative Rep. Justin Amash left the GOP when he favored impeachment. Amash is now an independent.

A crowd gathers on Federal Plaza for a protest against President Trump on the eve of a scheduled vote by the U.S. House of Representatives on the two articles of impeachment against the president, Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2019, in Chicago. (Associated Press)

After Trump's likely impeachment by a majority vote in the House, attention will soon shift to the Senate, which, under the Constitution, is required to hold a trial on the charges. That trial is expected to begin in January, and a two-thirds vote would be needed to convict Trump and remove him from office.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has embraced the partisan nature of impeachment, dropping pretenses of fairness -- such as those adopted by Democrats, which he has characterized as superficial and transparently phony, even as they refused GOP witness requests, called numerous hearsay witnesses, and introduced articles of impeachment that do not track any criminal statute.
“I'm not an impartial juror,” McConnell declared, saying that Democrats' procedures in the House were exclusively one-sided. The Republican-majority chamber is all but sure to acquit the president; McConnell has announced that he intends to spend Wednesday confirming new federal judges to lifetime appointments every two hours while Democrats are debating and voting on impeachment.
“Impeachment is a political decision,” McConnell said. "The House made a partisan political decision to impeach. I would anticipate we will have a largely partisan outcome in the Senate. I’m not impartial about this at all.''
McConnell struck back Tuesday at his Democratic counterpart's calls for an in-depth impeachment trial featuring multiple new witnesses, dismissing the push as a "fishing expedition" that would set a "nightmarish precedent."
"The Senate is meant to act as judge and jury, to hear a trial, not to re-run the entire fact-finding investigation because angry partisans rushed sloppily through it,” he said on the Senate floor.

"The Senate is meant to act as judge and jury, to hear a trial, not to re-run the entire fact-finding investigation because angry partisans rushed sloppily through it.”
— Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., joined by Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., left, and Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, dismisses the impeachment process against President Trump, saying, "I'm not an impartial juror. This is a political process," as he meets with reporters at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2019. (Associated Press)

In a Sunday letter, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer had called for the chamber to subpoena new documents and call witnesses who had been blocked by the White House during the impeachment inquiry on the House side.
McConnell claimed that such investigative steps, though, were part of the House role -- not a mission for the Senate. He warned that entertaining Schumer’s proposal to do House lawmakers’ “homework” could invite a string of future “dubious” and “frivolous” impeachment inquiries.
He stressed the fact-finding mission should have been completed during the impeachment inquiry led by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. McConnell accused the House of doing a rush job, and said Schumer is now looking "to make Chairman Schiff's sloppy work more persuasive."
Even after voting to impeach Trump, the House still would need to vote formally to send the impeachment articles to the Senate. In 1998, the House approved the resolution to send the articles to the Senate about 10 minutes after the House voted to impeach then-President Bill Clinton. But, Democrats might delay sending the articles to the GOP-held Senate this time around, in a bid to influence the proceedings there.
Such an unprecedented move, however, would likely only further inflame Republicans and moderates who have already looked with skepticism on the impeachment proceedings.
"The allegations against the President are incredibly, incredibly serious," Virginia Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger, who flipped a GOP seat in 2018, told constituents this week.
A constituent quickly retorted: "They're incredible bulls--t."
Fox News' Chad Pergram, Adam Shaw, and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Townhall Political Cartoons

Massive bill calls for $1.4 trillion in federal spending

WASHINGTON (AP) — House leaders unveiled a $1.4 trillion government-wide spending package with an unusually large load of unrelated provisions catching a ride on the last train out of Congress this year.

A House vote was slated for Tuesday on the sprawling package, some 2,313 pages long, as lawmakers wrap up reams of unfinished work — and vote on impeaching President Donald Trump.

The legislation would forestall a government shutdown this weekend and give Trump steady funding for his U.S.-Mexico border fence. The year-end package is anchored by a $1.4 trillion spending measure that caps a difficult, months-long battle over spending priorities.

The mammoth measure made public Monday takes a split-the-differences approach that’s a product of divided power in Washington, offering lawmakers of all stripes plenty to vote for — and against. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was a driving force, along with administration pragmatists such as Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who negotiated the summertime budget deal that it implements.

Trump hasn’t said for sure that he’ll sign the measure. He invariably has second thoughts, but he’s not interested in another government shutdown and has always bowed to Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., when they’ve teamed up on compromise spending packages.

Retired coal miners and labor union opponents of Obama-era taxes on high-cost health plans came away with big wins in weekend negotiations by top congressional leaders and the Trump White House. The bill would also increase the age nationwide for purchasing tobacco products from 18 to 21, and offers business-friendly provisions on export financing, flood insurance and immigrant workers.

The roster of add-ons grew over the weekend to include permanent repeal of a tax on high-cost “Cadillac” health insurance benefits and finance health care and pension benefits for about 100,000 retired union coal miners threatened by the insolvency of their pension fund. A tax on medical devices and health insurance plans would also be repealed permanently.

The deficit tab for the package grew as well — almost $400 billion over 10 years to repeal the three so-called “Obamacare” taxes alone — with a companion package to extend several business-friendly tax breaks still under negotiation. The Obama-era taxes have previously been suspended on a piecemeal basis.

The legislation is laced with provisions reflecting divided power in Washington. Republicans maintained the status quo on several abortion-related battles and on funding for Trump’s border wall. Democrats controlling the House succeeded in winning a 3.1 percent raise for federal civilian employees and the first installment of funding on gun violence research after more than two decades of gun lobby opposition.

The sweeping legislation, introduced as two packages for political and tactical purposes, is part of a major final burst of legislation that’s passing Congress this week despite bitter partisan divisions and Wednesday’s likely impeachment of Trump. Thursday promises a vote on a major rewrite of the North American Free Trade Agreement, while the Senate is about to send Trump the annual defense policy bill for the 59th year in a row.

The core of the spending bill is formed by the 12 annual agency appropriations bills passed by Congress each year. It fills in the details of a bipartisan framework from July that delivered about $100 billion in agency spending increases over the coming two years instead of automatic spending cuts that would have sharply slashed the Pentagon and domestic agencies.

The increase in the tobacco purchasing age to 21 also applies to e-cigarettes and vaping devices and gained momentum after McConnell signed on.

Other add-ons include a variety of provisions sought by business and labor interests and their lobbyists in Washington.

For business, there’s a seven-year extension of the charter of the Export-Import Bank, which helps finance transactions benefiting U.S. exporters, as well as a renewal of the government’s terrorism risk insurance program. The financially troubled government flood insurance program would be extended through September, as would several visa programs for both skilled and seasonal workers.

Labor won repeal of the so-called Cadillac tax, a 40% tax on high-cost employer health plans, which was originally intended to curb rapidly growing health care spending. But it disproportionately affected high-end plans won under union contracts, and Democratic labor allies had previously succeeded in temporary repeals.

Democrats controlling the House won increased funding for early childhood education and a variety of other domestic programs. They also won higher Medicaid funding for the cash-poor government of Puerto Rico, which is struggling to recover from hurricane devastation and a resulting economic downturn.

While Republicans touted defense hikes and Democrats reeled off numerous increases for domestic programs, most of the provisions of the spending bill enjoy bipartisan support, including increases for medical research, combating the opioid epidemic, and Head Start and childcare grants to states.

Democrats also secured $425 million for states to upgrade their election systems, and they boosted the U.S. Census budget $1.4 billion above Trump’s request. They won smaller increases for the Environmental Protection Agency, renewable energy programs and affordable housing.

“We are scaling up funding for priorities that will make our country safer and stronger and help hardworking families get ahead,” said House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.

The outcome in the latest chapter in the longstanding battle over Trump’s border wall awards Trump with $1.4 billion for new barriers — equal to last year’s appropriation — while preserving Trump’s ability to use his budget powers to tap other accounts for several times that amount. That’s a blow for liberal opponents of the wall but an acceptable trade-off for pragmatic-minded Democrats who wanted to gain $27 billion in increases for domestic programs and avert the threat of simply funding the government on autopilot.

Because dozens of Democrats might vote against the border wall, Pelosi is pairing money for the Department of Homeland Security with the almost $700 billion Pentagon budget, which is guaranteed to win GOP votes to offset Democratic defections.

The coal miners’ pension provision, opposed by House GOP conservatives like Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., had the backing of Trump and powerful Senate GOP Leader McConnell and Trump. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., was a dogged force behind the scenes and said the other leaders rolled the House GOP leader, who also lost a behind-the-scenes battle with Pelosi on parochial California issues.

“Something had to be done and we finally got Mitch McConnell to sign onto the bill,” Manchin said. “But we could not move McCarthy. Then finally we just had to move forward and they did it.”

Party-switching NJ congressman will need Trump’s help in ’20

In this file photo from Jan. 3, 2019, Rep. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J., arrives for a classified briefing on Capitol Hill in Washington. Van Drew, a Democrat who plans to switch and become a Republican, has said he plans to vote this week against impeaching President Donald Trump.The freshman represents a southern New Jersey district that Trump carried in 2016 and was expected to face a difficult reelection next year. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, file)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The political fate of party-switching Rep. Jeff Van Drew may well hinge on how forcefully he is backed by President Donald Trump, whose impeachment the New Jersey lawmaker is refusing to support.

With the House set for a near party-line vote impeaching Trump this week, the longtime Democrat told his staff two days ago that he will become a Republican, a former aide said Monday. Underscoring the partisan animosity that the impeachment fight has spawned, at least six of Van Drew’s top aides promptly quit.

Now, the 66-year-old former state legislator, who’s been a political powerhouse in his southern New Jersey district, must figure out how to survive a race in which local Democrats now despise him and Republicans don’t want him elbowing them aside.

His race will also test the electoral impact of his party switch on the face of the impeachment showdown, which has sharply divided the two parties. In recent years, congressional party switchers have had mixed records extending their careers.

Trump met with Van Drew last week and has complimented him on Twitter for his “honesty.” With impeachment on the horizon, Trump praised the congressman again early Tuesday. “Congressman Jeff Van Drew is very popular in our great and very united Republican Party,” the president wrote. “It was a tribute to him that he was able to win his heavily Republican district as a Democrat. People like that are not easily replaceable!

One rival for the GOP nomination for the seat says he’s been told Trump will endorse Van Drew. While there’s been no word on whether Trump will help Van Drew win the GOP nod in next June’s primary or aid him during next November’s general election, analysts say Trump’s backing will be crucial.

“Whatever trouble in the Republican primary Jeff Van Drew might have goes away when Donald Trump throws his arm around the guy,” said Ben Dworkin, director of the nonpartisan Rowan Institute for Public Policy & Citizenship in Glassboro, New Jersey.

Van Drew’s general election prospects will depend on factors including how liberal the Democratic presidential nominee and the Democrat seeking the House seat are. His district has become increasingly conservative, with Trump carrying it narrowly in 2016 after Barack Obama won it in 2008 and 2012.

“I think Van Drew would be the early favorite, assuming Trump helps him get the nomination,” said Patrick Murray, director of the nonpartisan Monmouth University Polling Institute.

Van Drew did not return phone calls and text messages seeking comment.

Van Drew’s defection to the GOP got a thumbs-up Monday from Cheryl McCleary as she waited tables at a luncheonette in Surf City, on New Jersey’s Long Beach Island.

“I appreciate the fact that he’s staying true to his conscience,” said McCleary, an independent voter. “If you feel like you’re not in touch with your party on key issues, it’s a good thing to switch.”

Van Drew’s decision came after a poll by his campaign showed that by 2-1 margins, voters in his district preferred alternatives to him in the primary and general election. The poll was provided by a senior Democratic aide.

“This is a guy who cut and ran away from the Democratic Party to protect his own skin,” said David Richter, former CEO of a global construction firm who’s seeking the GOP nomination.

Richter said local GOP officials have told him Trump will back Van Drew, but says he thinks he can still defeat him.

“Anybody who runs on the Republican side is against the impeachment. I’m against the impeachment,” Richter said. “That’s not enough. You also have to be someone who has integrity. You also have to be someone who stood up for Republican principles their whole lives.”

Van Drew, a former dentist, was a conservative state senator before he joined Congress, bucking Democrats on issues including gun control and gay marriage.

In his first year in Congress, Van Drew was among a handful of Democrats who voted against Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., becoming speaker. He and Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson were the only two Democrats who voted in October against starting the impeachment inquiry, and both were expected to oppose impeachment this week, with perhaps a handful of others.

Overall, Van Drew has voted with Trump 7 percent of the time, according the data tracking website fivethirtyeight.com. That’s one of the higher scores among House Democrats, and far beneath the lowest loyalty score for any Republican, which was 35 percent.

New Jersey Democrats were already bidding him good riddance.

“It’s certainly not a profiles in courage award that he gets,” Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., said in an interview. He said he believed Van Drew was switching because his anti-impeachment vote would have cost him the Democratic Party’s endorsement next year.

“Congressman Van Drew has long voted against core Democratic values,” Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy said in a tweet. “Betraying our party by siding with Donald Trump is the final straw.”

Montclair State University political science Professor Brigid Harrison, who declared Monday that she would seek the Democratic nomination for Van Drew’s seat, called Van Drew “a blind pawn for Donald Trump.”

After Republicans captured the House majority in 1994, five Democrats switched to the GOP, including two who lost their next elections. But Rep. Billy Tauzin of Louisiana joined the GOP leadership and became a committee chairman while Georgia Rep. Nathan Deal was elected governor.

“They were more than happy for us to leave,” former Rep. Mike Parker of Mississippi said of his former Democratic colleagues in an interview.

In 1999, five House Democrats backed impeaching President Bill Clinton. Three of them eventually switched to the GOP.

Among the most recent party switchers was Rep. Parker Griffith, D-Ala., who joined the GOP in 2009. He lost the Republican nomination for his seat the following year.

Conservative Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan left the GOP and became an independent this year after saying he was open to impeaching Trump. His prospects for reelection next year are unclear.

___

Associated Press writers Michael Catalini in Trenton and Wayne Parry in Surf City, New Jersey, contributed to this report.