The circus of events over the last two weeks in the House’s impeachment investigation and the events surrounding it are, when stacked up together, like something out of a bad convenience store-aisle novel about Washington.
Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee have had little success in challenging the central premise of the impeachment investigation: President Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine to pressure them to investigate Hunter Biden. This has been a particular challenge in the wake of repeated corroborating evidence from foreign services officers who cut a sharp profile in congressional hearings.
Republicans have instead spent their time on the panel testing talking points to deflect away from that fact. Typically, political talking points are tested in the private conference rooms of communications consultants, but inside the beltway this week Republicans were testing them in real-time. Let’s review them.
Republicans have argued that the aid was eventually released, which is true as far as it goes. But while it may win you points to put the cookie back in the cookie jar after mom catches you, that argument doesn’t usually work with prosecutors and it shouldn’t in congressional impeachment proceedings either.
Republicans have continued their process arguments, and this is the one that really exposes the hypocrisy of Washington. First, they demanded transcripts be released — they were, and they were damning. Then Republicans argued that the transcripts should be ignored, or that they must be doctored.
They have argued that witness accounts are merely hearsay. Meanwhile, they ignore the fact that hearsay rules don’t apply in impeachment proceedings, that hearsay rules have exceptions. They also ignore the fact that Trump has prohibited individuals with more direct knowledge of the president’s actions from testifying.
Republicans are demanding to speak to the whistleblower, even though Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and a host of Trump advisers have all confirmed the important elements of the whistleblower complaint.
Along the way, we’ve had a series of unbelievable events take place these last two weeks, such as Trump’s attempt to intimidate a witness against him in real-time when live-tweeting his feelings about Marie Yovanovitch during her impeachment testimony.
Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney attempted to join a lawsuit against the president to see if he could, in fact, testify in the impeachment proceedings over the president’s objection after a press conference in which he admitted to the central allegations of the impeachment investigation.
Impeachment proceedings aside, the White House described an emergency presidential visit to Walter Reed as getting an “early start” on the first part of his annual physical. The president pardoned three war criminals, while the world wondered whether Trump would also pardon convicted adviser Roger Stone. Lead Trump defender Rep. Jim Jordan received yet another allegation of ignoring sexual misconduct, this time from a wrestling referee, at a time when Jordan is ignoring evidence against the president.
Oh, I almost forgot to mention: It was revealed that former Giuliani client Lev Parnas was overheard describing a conversation with Trump and Giuliani in which Trump tasked Giuliani with a secret mission to convince Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.
There is at least a week left to go in the House’s public hearings, perhaps more. The Senate is expected to conduct up to six weeks of trial. It remains unlikely the Senate would convict the president under any circumstances.
The willingness of senators to carry water for Trump in this deeply flawed set of facts has always been more about the next election than the actual facts. The president’s coattails just got a lot shorter with epic defeats for Republican candidates in Kentucky and Louisiana that history suggests should have received a stronger push from the president’s stumping. That trial will also be presided over by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, and it’s hard to see him putting up with nonsense.
The pace in which these stark revelations have come to light makes it hard for the voting public to process them. Any one of these developments would cause a media circus for weeks in a normal administration, but the sheer breadth of Trump scandals helps to diminish the profile of each particular one.
Trump has a unique talent for generating media attention and making the conversation about him. That particular talent, combined with his own unwillingness to listen to sound advice and instead follow the poor strategic choices of his personal demons, may be what ruins his presidency.
J.W. Verret (@JWVerret) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is an associate professor at the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School.
