The speeches, the posturing and the punditry were all predictable, as was the final outcome.
Two
hundred and thirty-one House Democrats, with just two defectors, voted
yesterday to back the impeachment inquiry against President Trump, while
194 Republicans, with one former party member defecting, voted against
the measure.
It was a set-piece ritual of the kind that Washington
loves, and for all the bombast and the bloviating, it’s unlikely that a
single mind was changed.
This city woke up filled with bipartisan
joy after watching the Nationals clinch the World Series shortly before
midnight, but within hours, the air was once again thick with
polarizing emotions.
It was not a vote to impeach Trump, though it
was clearly a test vote toward that outcome. It comes more than two
decades after Newt Gingrich’s House voted to impeach Bill Clinton, and
four and a half decades after the House Judiciary Committee voted to
impeach Richard Nixon. After the first 180 years of our republic saw
only one impeachment, that of Andrew Johnson, the constitutional
provision has become more frequently weaponized in modern politics.
But like the party-line drive against Clinton, this one-sided effort seems almost certain to fail in the Senate.
Trump’s reaction was concise: “The Greatest Witch Hunt in American History!”
The
White House rushed out a statement: “Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats’
unhinged obsession with this illegitimate impeachment proceeding does
not hurt President Trump; it hurts the American people.”
Nancy
Pelosi invoked Ben Franklin and the founders, as she does with growing
frequency: “What is at stake in all of this is nothing less than our
democracy.”
Kevin McCarthy reduced it to raw politics: “Democrats
are trying to impeach the president because they are scared they cannot
defeat him at the ballot box. Why do you not trust the people?” Steve Scalise had a hammer-and-sickle sign as the GOP argued it’s a “Soviet-style” process.
Everyone is quoting Alexander Hamilton.
It
was a day to argue over process, which is what Washington does best, as
opposed to substance, to which the town often seems allergic.
Pelosi
made the move because the Republican criticism about a closed-door
process, with selective leaking of testimony, was starting to sting. She
knows she needs to move toward public hearings and to set some rules of
the road.
The speaker also must believe that the political winds
have shifted. Earlier, she wanted to spare nearly three dozen Democrats
in districts won by Trump from having to cast an early
impeachment-related vote. Now, after heavily negative coverage of
administration witnesses contradicted Trump on Ukraine, and a slight
shift in the polls, such a vote appears safe.
What’s more, Pelosi
has an eye on the clock. As the private hearings drag on, talk of
holding a final impeachment vote by Thanksgiving have faded; now
Democrats are hoping to wrap things up by Christmas. That would mean a
Senate trial in January, and with more snags, it could spill over into
the early February primary voting. Impeachment is already depriving the
Democratic candidates of media oxygen; this would be unprecedented, and
would pull the likes of Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Amy
Klobuchar off the campaign trail.
Despite
these uncertainties, the whole impeachment saga has the feel of a
scripted process. Pelosi once argued that impeachment could not work
without being bipartisan—suddenly that’s off the table. But there’s no
stopping this train now.
President Trump said Thursday he may read the transcript of his July 25 telephone conversation with Ukrainian
President Volodymyr Zelensky aloud to Americans in the style of
the famous fireside chats delivered by President Franklin Roosevelt
during the 1930s and 1940s.
“This is over a phone call that is a good call,” Trump said in an interview with the Washington Examiner. "At some point, I’m going to sit down, perhaps as a fireside chat on live television, and I will read the transcript of the call, because people have to hear it. When you read it, it’s a straight call.”
Roosevelt
delivered a series of informal radio addresses, dubbed fireside chats,
meant to garner support for his New Deal policies and update Americans
on the course of World War II, among other issues.
President Donald Trump speaks in the Diplomatic Room of the White House Sunday. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
A public reading of the call transcript would mark the latest effort by Trump to thwart the impeachment inquiry
against him by congressional Democrats. The president has repeatedly
denied Democratic claims that he withheld crucial military aid to Kiev
in order to press Zelensky to investigate former Vice President
Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.
Several witnesses have raised
concerns over the call. Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who serves as a
director on the National Security Council (NSC), testified privately
before Congress this week that he was alarmed by Trump's request to
Zelensky.
“Everybody knows I did nothing wrong,” Trump told the
Examiner. “Bill Clinton did things wrong; Richard Nixon did things
wrong. I won’t go back to [Andrew] Johnson because that was a little
before my time. But they did things wrong. I did nothing wrong.”
During
the interview, Trump said he was being responsible by reviewing aid to
Ukraine, a country with a history of endemic corruption.
“We are giving them money, we are giving them weapons,” he said. “We have an obligation to look at corruption.”
School officials in Austin, Texas, have made changes to the sex-education curriculum for middle school students – and a lot of parents are not happy with the results.
Planned Parenthood, one of the backers of the new plan, called it “LGBTQ inclusive, science-based and much needed,” according to the Austin American-Statesman.
A group called Texas Values led the opposition to the plan – and says it intends to fight its passage, which came in a unanimous vote early Tuesday morning after a large crowd gathered Monday night for the school board’s meeting.
The values group claims to have collected petition signatures from 5,000 people who oppose the curriculum – though Austin's KEYE-TV reported that parents can block their children from taking any or all of the lessons.
David
Walls, a parent and vice president of Texas Values, told the newspaper
that his group believes the plan encourages students to engage in
same-sex relationships.
“It’s not appropriate for school,” Walls
said. “It’s not appropriate for a government body to encourage students
to engage in any kind of sexual activity.”
On Thursday, Texas
Values posted a Twitter message mocking the school board’s preference
for the gender-neutral term “parent” over “mother” and “father.”
“What’s so scary about mom and dad?” the group wrote, using a Halloween theme.
Community member Barbara Bucklin told Austin radio station KUT that “gender identity” didn’t seem an appropriate topic for young children.
“Should you be suggesting to a 5-year-old or an 8-year-old or a 10-year-old that maybe they’re not a girl?” Bucklin asked.
“Should you be suggesting to a 5-year-old or an 8-year-old or a 10-year-old that maybe they’re not a girl?” — Barbara Bucklin, opponent of sex-ed curriculum changes
But
Michelle Rusnak, the district’s health and physical education
supervisor, said the goal of the plan is to represent LGBTQ views
fairly, not to impose them.
“It’s about acceptance,” she told the American-Statesman.
“It’s about acceptance.” — Michelle Rusnak, school district’s health and physical education supervisor
Prior to Tuesday’s vote, school officials had already made changes to the revised curriculum proposal based on parents’ input, according to the newspaper.
For
example, officials agreed to delay discussions of sexual orientation
and HIV until fifth grade, rather than third grade. They also deleted
the term “anal sex” from a lesson about preventing HIV and STDs,
although the term is used in a lesson on abstinence, and they canceled a
video that included depictions of gay and mixed-race couples.
“There’s
no doubt that the topic of sex education in public schools elicits
strong reactions,” board member Kristin Ashy told the crowd Monday
night. “Tonight offers itself as an example of these reactions.”
Students whose parents approve of the plan will begin learning the new lessons in May, reports said.
President Trump, a born-and-bred New Yorker, announced Thursday that he has changed his permanent residence to Palm Beach, Fla., because of the way politicians in New York City and the state of New York have treated him.
“I
cherish New York, and the people of New York, and always will, but
unfortunately, despite the fact that I pay millions of dollars in city,
state and local taxes each year, I have been treated very badly by the
political leaders of both the city and state. Few have been treated
worse,” the president tweeted.
“I hated having to make this
decision, but in the end it will be best for all concerned. As
President, I will always be there to help New York and the great people
of New York. It will always have a special place in my heart!”
The New York Times originally obtained the court documents
for Trump’s change of address from Trump Tower in New York City to the
location of his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, where he's built a
residence. First lady Melania Trump also changed her residence to the
same location in an identical document.
“If I maintain another
place or places of abode in some other state or states, I hereby declare
that my above-described residence and abode in the State of Florida
constitutes my predominant and principal home, and I intend to continue
it permanently as such,” the Trump file read.
“I
formerly resided at 721 Fifth Avenue,” the document said. Trump, raised
in the borough of Queens, moved into the skyscraper in midtown
Manhattan in 1983.
The document lists Trump’s “other places of
abode” as 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, aka the White House, and his private
golf club in Bedminster, N.J.
Trump has spent 99 days at his
Florida resort since becoming president, while he’s spent only 20 days
at Trump Tower, according to NBC News.
In
response to Trump, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo tweeted: "Good riddance.
It's not like @realDonaldTrump paid taxes here anyway... He's all yours,
Florida."
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren
accused the president of making the move so he can shield his tax
information from New York authorities.
"Donald Trump doesn't want
the state of New York to see his taxes—I wonder why," Warren wrote.
"Let's call this out for what it is: Corruption, plain and simple. Under
my anti-corruption plan, all presidential candidates would be required
to release their tax returns."
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who ended his own run for the presidency, echoed Cuomo's remarks.
"Don't let the door hit you on the way out or whatever," de Blasio wrote.
Trump
is due to make an appearance in New York City this weekend to attend an
MMA fight at Madison Square Garden. He's scheduled to spend Saturday
night at Trump Tower.
While Trump said his change of residence was
due to poor treatment by New York officials, some have speculated he
could be doing so for tax purposes. Florida does not have a state income
tax or an inheritance tax and has long been a haven for wealthy former
New Yorkers.
In August, Heritage Foundation chief economist Steve Moore appeared on “The Daily Briefing” to say that New Yorkers fleeing to Florida for tax purposes may be the “biggest economic story” in the country.
He
said there are four so-called "states of the apocalypse” – New York,
New Jersey, Connecticut, and Illinois – from where residents are fleeing
in droves due to high taxes and state budget issues.
Moore said the states benefitting the most from this population movement are Florida, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and North Carolina.
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, penned an op-ed on Wednesday expressly refuting claims by former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton that she is "favorite of the Russians" planning to run as a spoiler candidate to help reelect President Trump.
In
the Wall Street Journal piece, Gabbard writes that she is running for
president “to undo Mrs. Clinton’s failed legacy.” She adds that after
she decided to endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., over Clinton in 2016,
Clinton never forgave the slight.
“The smears have been nonstop ever since,” Gabbard writes.
Earlier
this month, Clinton said on David Plouffe’s podcast that a Democratic
candidate was being groomed for a third-party run in 2020. Clinton's
team later confirmed the former secretary of state was referring to
Gabbard.
"I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got
their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are
grooming her to be the third-party candidate," Clinton told Plouffe. Market Watch
reported, however, that Clinton was referring to Republicans, not the
Russians, as “grooming” Gabbard for a third-party run, revising some
initial media reports.
Gabbard hit back at Clinton on Twitter,
calling her the “queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and
personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so
long.”
She also claimed that from the beginning of her candidacy there has been a concerted effort to destroy her reputation.
“Whether Mrs. Clinton’s name is on the ballot or not, her foreign policy will be,” Gabbard wrote in the op-ed,
writing that many of the Democratic candidates “adhere to her doctrine
of acting as the world’s police, using the tools of war to overthrow
governments we don’t like, wasting taxpayer dollars, costing American
lives, causing suffering and destruction abroad, and undermining
America’s security.”
Meanwhile, Gabbard announced last week that she will not seek re-election to Congress so she can focus on her presidential bid.
Rep. Katie Hill, D-Calif., is expected to deliver a farewell address to Congress on
Thursday after announcing her resignation last weekend amid a House
Ethics investigation following allegations she had inappropriate sexual
relationships with a female campaign staffer and her male congressional
legislative director.
Reports of money paid to both -- consulting fees for the female staffer and an "election bonus" for the male aide -- have also drawn scrutiny.
The
freshman lawmaker will deliver her final address after Congress votes
to legitimize -- and set parameters for -- the ongoing House impeachment inquiry
into President Trump, USA Today reported. Hill has played a role in
impeachment efforts as the vice chair of the House Oversight and Reform
Committee and a freshman liaison to Democratic leaders. Her last day in
Congress will be Friday, her office said.
Hill said she would “not
allow my experience to scare off other young women or girls from
running for office.” She also slammed “the right-wing media” and her
Republican opponents for carrying out a “coordinated campaign” to smear
her name and perpetuate what she described as her estranged husband’s
abusive behavior toward her.
Hill announced her resignation Sunday
after denying she had an inappropriate relationship with her male
congressional legislative director, which had prompted a House Ethics
investigation. She also admitted she had an "inappropriate" relationship
with a female campaign staffer, after a series of leaks of personal
texts and photos.
The conservative website RedState.com first
reported Oct. 10 that Hill, 32, who is openly bisexual, previously had
been involved in a "throuple," or a three-person relationship, with a
female campaign staffer and her estranged husband Kenny Heslep, who has
since filed for divorce. According to RedState.com, Heslep filed for
divorce after learning of Hill’s alleged affair with her male
legislative director, Graham Kelly.
Hill never directly accused
her estranged husband of leaking the photos. Heslep, who married Hill in
2010, reportedly told his father that he thought his computer had been
hacked around the same time the photos surfaced in media reports,
according to BuzzFeed News.
Heslep’s father told BuzzFeed
on Wednesday that his son denied any role in distributing the photos
but said he did not contact law enforcement when he began experiencing
computer problems before the RedState.com story was published.
RedState.com also published screenshots of a since-deleted Facebook post
written by Heslep in which he publicly accused Hill of having an affair
with her male congressional staff member. That allegation launched the
House Ethics investigation.
Red State and the Daily Mail
published nude photos that purportedly show the freshman congresswoman,
some with an identified female campaign aide, and one which shows Hill
undressed holding a bong. Attorneys representing Hill sent the Daily Mail a cease-and-desist letter,
claiming the photos were published without Hill’s permission and
threatening legal action if the British tabloid did not remove the
images from its website.
Also
Thursday, George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign aide who has
alleged that he was targeted in FBI’s Russia probe as part of a scheme
to take down his boss, is expected to formally announce his candidacy
for Hill's seat in California's 25th Congressional District north of Los
Angeles. Papadopoulos on Tuesday filed paperwork to run for the seat to
be vacated by Hill. He pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during former
Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe into Russian interference in the
2016 presidential election.
Hill unseated an incumbent Republican
in 2018 and is one of the few openly bisexual members of Congress.
Since her resignation announcement, three Republicans and one Democrat
have said they plan to run for her seat, USA Today reported. Fox News' Gregg Re, Joseph A. Wulfsohn and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
President Donald Trump speaks in the Diplomatic Room of the White House Sunday. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
