RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Pierce writes: "Subpoena them all. Put them under oath and on television. Begin impeachment inquiries on Monday."

A demonstration calling for impeachment of Donald Trump in Oakland, California. (photo: Bay Area News Group)
A demonstration calling for impeachment of Donald Trump in Oakland, California. (photo: Bay Area News Group)


The Mueller Report Is a Challenge to Congress: Save the Republic. Impeach the President.

By Charles Pierce, Esquire

19 April 19


We surrendered it without firing a shot. Now the way forward is clear.

ow that I've spent a few hours wading through the Great Grimpen Mire exposed by Robert Mueller and his prosecutors, I don't know why it is, but this one sentence put on its hobnailed boots and jumped off a cliff right onto my exposed last nerve. It comes in a passage about how the White House and the president* were trying to lie their way around the fact that James Comey was being fired as director of the FBI because he refused to let go of Michael Flynn. The administration* concocted an elaborate story about how one of its reasons to dismiss Comey was that morale had cratered at the Bureau.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, a woman who somehow has managed to degrade further a podium behind which Ari Fleischer once stood, which I never believed was possible, even tried to sell this leaky chamber-pot to the White House press corps, saying that "countless" FBI agents had reached out about how happy they were with Comey's dismissal. Naturally, this was of some interest to Mueller and his team, so they invited SHS in for a little chat, under oath this time. They asked her about this particular story, and this is what the report says was the answer to that question.

Sanders acknowledged to investigators that her comments were not founded on anything.

There is the entire 2016 campaign and the entire administration summed up in one sentence hallowed by oath. This is a president* not founded on anything, an administration not founded on anything, and an entire government not founded on anything—a great, foul, heaving truthless mass that has been allowed to swallow up the institutions of self-government because many of the people whose responsibility it is to protect those institutions abandoned them to their own fate.

The results are in the report released by Robert Mueller and his investigators on Thursday. It is a document that shows clearly that every guardian of the republic—especially including the people themselves—surrendered it to an international criminal cabal without firing hardly a shot. Also in that report is a challenge: there is one last chance to avert the threat, and it lies with the United States Congress, and with the people who elected its members. Mueller has dropped it all in the country's lap. He did what he could.

Subpoena them all. Put them under oath and on television. Begin impeachment inquiries on Monday. (You can have the weekend. I'm generous.) Fumigate the entire government because, what we have now, and what Mueller illustrated, is the political equivalent of a plague cell. Fumigate it. Burn its furnishings. This administration is candida auris, the anti-bacterial superbug that The New York Times tells us is running amuck in hospitals.

The man at Mount Sinai died after 90 days in the hospital, but C. auris did not. Tests showed it was everywhere in his room, so invasive that the hospital needed special cleaning equipment and had to rip out some of the ceiling and floor tiles to eradicate it.“Everything was positive — the walls, the bed, the doors, the curtains, the phones, the sink, the whiteboard, the poles, the pump,” said Dr. Scott Lorin, the hospital’s president. “The mattress, the bed rails, the canister holes, the window shades, the ceiling, everything in the room was positive.”

That's the national government right now. Everything in it is positive.

There is no question that the president* is in deep contravention of his oath of office. He has not faithfully executed his office. He has not preserved, protected, or defended the Constitution of the United States. There is hardly a single one of the 400-odd pages on which cannot be found a violation of the constitutional oath.

On Saturday, June 17, 2017, the President called McGahn and directed him to have the Special Counsel removed. [Don] McGahn was at home and the President was at Camp David. In interviews with this Office, McGahn recalled that the President called him at home twice and on both occasions directed him to call Rosenstein and say that Mueller had conflicts that precluded him from serving as Special Counsel. On the first call, McGahn recalled that the President said something like, “You gotta do this. You gotta call Rod.” McGahn said he told the President that he would see what he could do.

McGahn was perturbed by the call and did not intend to act on the request. He and other advisors believed the asserted conflicts were “silly” and “not real,” and they had previously communicated that view to the President. McGahn also had made clear to the President that the White House Counsel’s Office should not be involved in any effort to press the issue of conflicts. McGahn was concerned about having any role in asking the Acting Attorney General to fire the Special Counsel because he had grown up in the Reagan era and wanted to be more like Judge Robert Bork and not “ Saturday Night Massacre Bork.” McGahn considered the President’s request to be an inflection point and he wanted to hit the brakes.

Efforts to curtail the Special Counsel’s investigation. Two days after directing McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed, the President made another attempt to affect the course of the Russia investigation. On June 19, 2017, the President met one-on-one in the Oval Office with his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, a trusted advisor outside the government, and dictated a message for Lewandowski to deliver to Sessions. The message said that Sessions should publicly announce that, notwithstanding his recusal from the Russia investigation, the investigation was “very unfair” to the President, the President had done nothing wrong, and Sessions planned to meet with the Special Counsel and “let [him] move forward with investigating election meddling for future elections.” Lewandowski said he understood what the President wanted Sessions to do.

One month later, in another private meeting with Lewandowski on July 19, 2017, the President asked about the status of his message for Sessions to limit the Special Counsel investigation to future election interference. Lewandowski told the President that the message would be delivered soon. Hours after that meeting, the President publicly criticized Sessions in an interview with the New York Times, and then issued a series of tweets making it clear that Sessions’s job was in jeopardy. Lewandowski did not want to deliver the President’s message personally, so he asked senior White House official Rick Dearborn to deliver it to Sessions. Dearborn was uncomfortable with the task and did not follow through.

The president* found a dirty deed that even Corey Fcking Lewandowski wouldn't do. Also, if I'm Don McGahn. I'm running a geiger counter over my cornflakes for a while.

The election itself was deeply infected as well.

Manafort briefed Kilimnik on the state of the Trump Campaign and Manafort’s plan to win the election. That briefing encompassed the Campaign’s messaging and its internal polling data. According to [Rick] Gates, it also included discussion of “battleground” states, which Manafort identified as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. Manafort did not refer explicitly to “battleground” states in his telling of the August 2 discussion.

Gates might want to stay clear of polonium for a while, too.

Mueller's diagnosis is clear and uncompromising. He has given us all the bad news at once and left the choice of treatment up to the patient. And, whether we have the stomach for it or not, it's time to take the painful cure. There is an ancient remedy that was asserted in 1974, by the late Barbara Jordan, Democrat of Texas, the last time the republic was as sick as it is today.

It is wrong, I suggest, it is a misreading of the Constitution for any member here to assert that for a member to vote for an article of impeachment means that that member must be convinced that the President should be removed from office. The Constitution doesn't say that. The powers relating to impeachment are an essential check in the hands of the body of the Legislature against and upon the encroachments of the Executive. The division between the two branches of the Legislature, the House and the Senate, assigning to the one the right to accuse and to the other the right to judge, the Framers of this Constitution were very astute. They did not make the accusers and the judgers -- and the judges the same person....

...James Madison again at the Constitutional Convention: "A President is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution." The Constitution charges the President with the task of taking care that the laws be faithfully executed, and yet the President has counseled his aides to commit perjury, willfully disregard the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, conceal surreptitious entry, attempt to compromise a federal judge, while publicly displaying his cooperation with the processes of criminal justice.

"A President is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution."

And there you are.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+1 # logical1 2019-04-19 14:15
Are we going to get some governing done or
impeach the a-hole?
Congress could stop the government, as the rethugs would do in an effort to impeach a Dem president.
That will just continue the stalemated congress (with no chance that the senate will remove him).
 
 
+25 # MLMDVM 2019-04-19 15:53
If we make no effort to impeach, that means no major news coverage of investigative proceedings in Congress that would be a means of communicating the truth to even larger numbers of the public. I think it would be hard for the public to ignore the facts in such a visible venue. If the Mueller report results in no action by the Democrats, they are ignoring their congressional responsibilitie s to put a check on what has obviously been illegal behavior on the part of a president who sees himself as a dictator. Shall we whimper and bend over one more time? Congress is getting little done in any case, thanks to McConnell. Even if the Senate will not remove Trump from office, impeachment investigations by the House will be one more way to demonstrate how completely the Republicans have been bought if they refuse to remove him from office. I stand with Pierce, AOC and the others who say that it's now time.
 
 
+11 # Texas Aggie 2019-04-20 03:11
There ARE people who can walk and chew gum at the same time, you know. We even elected a bunch of them the last time around.
 
 
+4 # Buddha 2019-04-22 18:01
The GOP uses investigations and impeachment IN LIEU of legislating. The Dems, by not controlling the Senate or the Presidency, have little legislation they can get passed...but impeaching the a-hole IS still governing, it is the Constitutional responsibility of our electoral representatives when a Mad King arises. Problem is we have a Mad 35% of our voters who are cult-believers in that Mad King. This is the same madness of Europe in the 1930's...
 
 
+37 # susanlno 2019-04-19 14:44
Of course, impeachment would require a strong, principled opposition party. We don't have that, any more than we have legitimately elected president.
 
 
+4 # Cat Mom 2019-04-19 21:34
Quoting susanlno:
Of course, impeachment would require a strong, principled opposition party. We don't have that, any more than we have legitimately elected president.

There is much truth to this. Let us hope it is not the whole truth....maybe some backbones are growing out of reach of Pelosi and Stoyer.
 
 
+27 # PABLO DIABLO 2019-04-19 14:47
Yeah, good luck with that. The members of Congress may not like Trump, but they like raking in the bucks. That includes about 95% of them. Citizens United pays. Pays well. Nothing will change while we can't get along.
 
 
+1 # johnescher 2019-04-21 05:35
Quoting PABLO DIABLO:
Yeah, good luck with that. The members of Congress may not like Trump, but they like raking in the bucks. That includes about 95% of them. Citizens United pays. Pays well. Nothing will change while we can't get along.


"Get along." Are you kidding? Do you mean make the vampire sympathetic like Anne Rice?

How about this silver spike: two high crimes (hush money to Stormy and Karen) and 1250 misdemeanors.

Or do you think we all should lie down and never utter a peep? What do you really think?
 
 
+2 # HenryS1 2019-04-19 15:36
Wonderfully entertaining stuff, crafted to the most artfully extreme pitch of hyperbolic frenzy. A lot of fun, and cathartic to read.

But we are all getting habituated to echo chamber stuff. It creates the illusion that things are so outrageous that they couldn't possibly continue that way.

But things ARE that bad, and getting worse. And most of this country thinks things are just fine, or, if they are worried, they worry only about what Trump and Fox tell them to worry about.

So I don't feel that good reading this, even if it makes me feel better for a while. And if someone on the Right reads this, it is so obviously slanted that they become more certain that nothing the Left says makes any sense.
 
 
+16 # USADUDE 2019-04-19 18:58
As much as I would like to see Agent Orange the Russian puppet removed from office, I’m reluctant to have him impeached. Why, you may ask? Pence with his infatuated looks will pardon this career criminal President* thus giving him a get out of jail free card. I want to see the whining little bitch held to account for once in his miserable life. A pardon like Nixon got is as unacceptable today as it was in the 1970s. Nobody is above the law. This garbage about not indicting a President* is the most insane public policy. We have a man who knowingly received help from Russia to get elected and actively obstructed the investigation into the election sabotage and his role in it. To not be able to bring such a criminal to justice is injustice. I want this fraudulent Russian money laundering career criminal to sit in a jail cell for the next 20 years.
 
 
+1 # crispy 2019-04-20 22:34
Impeachement is NOT inditement and does NOT get you in jail
 
 
+2 # Street Level 2019-04-19 19:12
It's not worth Pelosi's time. Can we get rid of her too?
 
 
+7 # Kiwikid 2019-04-19 19:15
I wonder if impeachment is off the table because the Dem know it to be a futile exercise - it will never pass the Senate.
Proceeding toward impeachment, however, is one way of keeping the issues contained in the Mueller report live before the American people all the way up till the 2020 election. It also will force the Repubs to make a choice - defend the indefensible, or do the right thing.
Having said that, I believe that doing the right thing and impeaching Trump would be disastrous for the American people. Given the level of polarisation that is evident in all that I see and hear, this would likely result in blood in the streets - and quite a lot of it.
Best that the Dems gather around a solid candidate and dump Trump at the polls. This next election is one for them to lose. The Presidency is already their's providing they don't 'snatch defeat from the jaws of victory' (which, given past performances, is a real possibility. In the meantime contain the administration as best they can.
 
 
+7 # suziemama 2019-04-19 21:18
It doesn't necessarily matter if the Senate would remove Donald Trump. Nixon resigned when he saw the writing on the wall. The question is, will Donald Trump be held accountable? Will Democrats actually defend the Republic and the Constitution and proceed with impeachment? Fortune favors the bold. House members must take the path of courage and justice, and ignore those naysayers that whimper helplessly in the corner.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2019-04-20 22:32
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdiVn3lQDgU
It is about cleansing the Office as Lindsey Graham said about Clinton (in 99) watch above Utube short video
 
 
+4 # Cat Mom 2019-04-19 21:39
A guilty pleasure to care about minor matters, but I loved the comment about Ari Fleischer. My nerves still rankle at the mention of his name.
 
 
+9 # treerapper 2019-04-20 06:18
The eggs belong in the NYS basket. NY can get him on criminal wrongdoing and they absolutely must do that. His criminal business dealings are not protected by his presidency and one would not have to be concerned about the GOP and their silence because of the benefits - a grossly altered judiciary which will haunt us for decades to come. The NY State DA should subpoena Mueller's report and add that to all the dirt they already have on the dirtbag. Would be nice to finally lock up the bottom-feeding cesspool dweller, once and for all.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2019-04-20 22:31
lock him up along with his criminal family!
 
 
+7 # dbrize 2019-04-20 13:26
This stuff has gone beyond Orwellian. Poor Charles Pierce. Calling on Congress to “save” our Republic. Earth calling in:

We have no republic.

We are a global empire complete with the trappings, i.e, 800 military bases scattered about our satraps.

A global campaign to choose “acceptable” governments for our “allies”.

A militarized home front encouraged to endorse the empire at near every sporting event and public gathering extant.

A MSM that extols and encourages our imperial ambitions on a daily basis.

An imperial government secured by an unconstitutiona l national spying apparatus “protecting” our nation from its citizens.

This all came about with the ongoing consent of Congress. And here Congress is asked to save it? Really? Should we laugh or cry?

Let us at least be truthful.

Impeaching Trump is no more than an act of competing imperial interests. It has nothing to do with “saving” that which is long gone, our republic.
 
 
-1 # johnescher 2019-04-21 05:40
Defeatism, dbrize. That's what you seem to espouse. Won't you do or say anything to stop the vampire from having another term?
 
 
+3 # dbrize 2019-04-21 16:06
Quoting johnescher:
Defeatism, dbrize. That's what you seem to espouse. Won't you do or say anything to stop the vampire from having another term?


If you would like to discuss any perceived errors in what I stated by all means point them out. To infer “defeatism” from a list of specific reasons why I find the reference to our “republic” sadly amusing is imo a non sequitur.

To have a “victory” begs the question, victory over what?

You consider stopping the “vampire” a victory. I see this “victory” as little more than replacing one group of thieves with a perhaps, lesser group of thieves. To you, Trump somehow “stole” the election from Clinton and must therefore “pay for it”. I disagree with this POV, but more important, I find it irrelevant because a restoration of our Republic would be no closer with either in the WH.

You are welcome to disagree, but I will do what I have for some time now, decry the loss of our constitutional republic and support the few candidates from either right or left whom I believe “get it”. If this be your definition of defeatism, so be it. I defer.
 
 
-1 # johnescher 2019-04-22 16:58
No, I certainly would enjoy seeing Trump finally get his come-uppance (there's nothing in the world like a good story), but vengeance is not my main motivation. I just want to see Trump's presidency come to an end, and I can't believe that anyone else we've heard of would be as bad. To give one example, Trump has separated mother from child. That in my view is an absolute in awfulness. Would Pence do that? He would be bad for sure but would he do that? Maybe. But I think you're finding false equivalence and being awfully glib and cynical about politicians, who, though bad, are not as bad as Trump. Nobody we've seen in recent history is as bad as Trump except a few dictators of third world countries and other right-wing maniacs in larger countries. Well, it's a complex issue. The American forefathers clearly wanted us to act against the likes of Donald Trump, not sit back and let him have his way.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2019-04-20 22:29
"Impeachment is not about punishment; nimpeachment is about cleansing the Office..." Senator Lindsey Graham
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdiVn3lQDgU
And BOY does the Office need cleansing with Trump!
 
 
+1 # DongiC 2019-04-22 17:45
dbrize's remarks about the demise of our republic serve a very useful purpose: they alert the electorate to a critical fact. There is a death in our house which we are prone to ignore. Our government has undergone a most profound change and the population knows that it doesn't want to know about it.

But dbrize insists on his facts and he may well be right. We have morphed into a military empire which is concerned with how other governments rule themselves as well as how well they protect their wealthy class. We protect our wealthy class very, very well and they, in turn, see to it that the military people have more than ample budgets for all their many military toys.

We are at a great divide and there may be hope for a revival of our republic. If this does not happen and the current political philosophy prevails, then the empire wins and will soon (about 12 years) be smashed by an environment increasingly more hostile. The sixth extinction will have started and humankind will have commenced its sad move to destruction. Bombs, missiles and weapons of all kinds will have produced a poor defense against an outraged Mother Nature.

How could we have been so monumentally stupid? We fell in love with the tool (money) and not the values that it served, life and happiness. We have created our own hell. Now we must suffer. How incredibly sad.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN