Democratic Congresswoman Changes Mind On Impeachment (UPDATE ADDED)
[guest post by Dana]
A quick little post here, involving a bit of that was then, this is now from Democratic Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence, who represents a very blue district:
Over the summer, Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence fully backed the move to impeach President Trump, but the Detroit-area Democrat said over the weekend that she has since changed her mind.
“I feel we should begin that process,” Lawrence told CNN on June 12. “If we impeach him, he is still sitting in the White House because the Senate must act.”
“Our democracy is bigger than Donald Trump, and we need to act,” added the congresswoman, who since 2015 has represented Michigan’s 14th District, which includes eastern Detroit.
Now, however, Lawrence said she sees things differently.
“You can censure, you don’t have to remove the president,” Lawrence said Sunday on No BS News Hour with Charlie LeDuff. “Sitting here, knowing how divided this country is, I don’t see the value of kicking him out of office, but I do see the value of putting down a marker saying his behavior is not acceptable.”
“I’ll be g-damned,” the host said at one point in response to Lawrence’s remarks. “To hear you say, and you are a Democrat, and you are a liberal minded person; I know you don’t like Trump For the betterment of all of us, in an election year, it’s unwise to tear him from the chair. Is that how you think?”
“Yeah,” Lawrence responded.
At this point in time, Nancy Pelosi remains mum on whether censuring Trump will be an available option. Regardless, Lawrence’s flip on this has got to be the last thing that Pelosi wants the public to hear coming from her side of the aisle.
With that, CNN is reporting that, since the impeachment hearings began, not much has changed:
Half of Americans say Trump should be impeached and removed from office, 43% say he should not. Neither figure has changed since October, with support for impeachment remaining at its highest level thus far in CNN polling. The partisan divide over the President persists as well, with roughly 80 points between Democratic support for Trump’s removal and Republican support for it.
Independents are closely divided on the question, 47% in favor, 45% opposed. Opinions on both sides are deeply held, with about 9 in 10 on either side saying they feel strongly in favor or against it.
The President’s approval rating has also held about even since October: 42% say they approve, 54% disapprove.
Although views on impeachment and removal have not moved, the poll finds that 53% say Trump improperly used his office to gain political advantage, up from 49% who said the same in October. More, 56%, say the President’s efforts to get Ukraine to launch investigations into the Biden family, a Ukrainian energy company and the 2016 election were more to benefit himself politically than to fight Ukrainian corruption.
The public is about evenly divided over whether there is enough evidence now for the House to vote to impeach the President and send him to trial before the Senate (48% say yes, 47% say no). And a narrow majority (52%) say the Democrats have exercised their constitutional powers properly during the impeachment inquiry, 40% say they have abused their constitutional powers.
This is isn’t the only poll that’s found things unchanged.
UPDATE: New Quinnipiac poll:
While 40 percent of all registered voters approve of the job President Trump is doing, 54 percent disapprove. This compares to a 38 – 58 percent approval rating in an October 23 poll, and falls within the range of where his job approval rating has been over about the last two years.
…While 45 percent of American voters think President Trump should be impeached and removed from office, 48 percent don’t think he should be. In an October 23 poll, 48 percent thought he should be impeached and removed and 46 percent didn’t think so.
(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)
–Dana
Good morning.
Dana (cb74ca) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:08 amIt should be noted: on 11/23/2011 — roughly the same point in his first term — Obama’s approval rating at Gallup was 41% approve, 51% disapprove. Much is made of Trump’s polling numbers but they are not the outliers that people seem to think.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:30 amObama’s approval ratings were negative most of his Presidency. He started off with goodwill, then went negative 2010-11 and going positive only late in 2012 in time for re-election. Then back down into the 40s until 2016.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:33 amShe’s already flipped back. Clearly the Party can’t have people stepping out of line.
Edoc118 (7edcb4) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:38 amIf Pelosi holds an impeachment vote and it fails, she’s toast.
OTOH, all those freshman Democrats in reddish seats, who won on a Trump-dissatisfaction vote are going to have some ‘splaining to do. It seems likely that impeachment will cost Pelosi her job, one way or the other.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:43 amImpeachment without removal is a form of censure. Only two other presidents in our history have hit that level of disapproval, and that “impeached” label is attached to both of them forever.
Paul Montagu (00daa1) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:45 am3. Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:33 am
Opinion probably didn’t really change.
When not close to an election, people take the question of how good a job the president is doing as referring to the things most prominent in the news in he last six weeks, and for a lot of that time it was Obamacare, and there were other things that went on worth criticizing; near an election, it’s an evaluation of the previous three or four years, and is taken to refer to more fundamental things, like keeping the peace and avoiding a recession.
Sammy Finkelman (1a8726) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:49 amJack Holmes
@jackholmes0
In a world without press briefings, the White House press corps has mostly accepted a system of ritual abuse, where they are forced to ask the world’s most powerful man questions over the roar of a helicopter engine.
_ _
Stephen Miller
@redsteeze
The last guy tried to use his justice department to charge journalists as co-conspirators while also wire tapping our phones, but Trump makes us stand outside and shout over a helicopter.
__ _
Joe Blow
@josephblosef
It’s cool if you spy on us and hack our computers but my god, helicopter noise?! You animal
__
Barrett Wiedeman
harkin (337580) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:53 am@barrettwiedemen
·
Press: After doing everything we can for three years to destroy this President, how DARE he take our questions outside next to a helicopter.
_
The President’s approval rating has also held about even since October: 42% say they approve, 54% disapprove.
We care what people think unless it’s an election.
Munroe (dd6b64) — 11/26/2019 @ 9:58 amIsn’t this what Rush Limbaugh said?
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/11/25/is-pelosi-looking-for-a-way-out
Sammy Finkelman (1a8726) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:01 amI realize that I’m a person of a suspicious mind, but if he got kicked out of office, all the scandal would go away. Pence is boring. I do wonder if some have made the political calculation that their chances are better they keep letting Trump dig his hole deeper.
@9 Er. You do realize that technically speaking, what “the people” thought was that Clinton should be President?
Nic (896fdf) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:10 am1. Lick finger.
Bored Lawyer (998177) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:18 am2. Raise finger to the wind.
3. Feel which side is cold.
4. That’s the way the wind blows.
Yes, conservative Republicans only have themselves to blame for this current absurdity and it has come back to bite them in the azz. Thank Newt Gingrich and his posse for weaponizing impeachment back in the day in desperation because of the failure to persuade and deliver. It has become a caricature of intent for every side now; like threatening thermonuclear war every month.
Only four of these dramas in nearly 250 years– three in the past 45. It’s nuts; it’s immature, too– and the adults driving nails and school buses outside the Beltway know it and are sick of it. Politics is the art of compromise, not endless my-way-or-the-highway-sieges of the Alamo. Little wonder fewer and fewer people self-identify as members of these major parties. If you send money to either one, you’re a loon or just a sucker.
Damn it, do your jobs: compromise, censure the sunnuvabitch, like you should have the day after Helsinki, and get on with the business of the people.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:43 amWhat happens if Rudi, Bolton, or Mulvaney conclude that the President is willing to sacrifice them and tie him more closely to Putin in this Ukranian mess?
John B Boddie (0fa0b7) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:50 amWe have to consider all the ramifications, as another commented suggested yesterday. What if Trump is removed and One Direction gets together again?
nk (dbc370) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:54 am#13: Clinton’s impeachment began with a widespread disgust with Bill Clinton’s behavior with an intern. As the process developed, things changed. The GOP base became invested in impeachment and the Democrat base became invested in Bill Clinton. Liberals who were saying “Clinton should resign” when the news broke had become convinced that they had to support Clinton to oppose Gingrich.
So, by the time that the actual impeachment happened, everything had shifted, Gingrich et al had no choice but to go forward but the popular mood was no longer with them, thanks to a liberal press.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:58 amThis time, it is the liberal press spearheading the drive to impeach.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 10:59 am@16/@17. The “press” isn’t spearheading anything; they’re generating content; 99.9% of which is opinion for clicks and TeeVee eyeballs to entertain you.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:11 amWhite House Invited to Participate in Impeachment Hearing Next Week
The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday invited President Trump’s legal team to participate in its first public impeachment hearing next week, when lawmakers plan to convene a panel of constitutional scholars to inform the panel’s debate over whether the president’s actions amount to “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The Judiciary Committee scheduled the hearing, “The Impeachment Inquiry into President Donald J. Trump: Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,” for Dec. 4. Democratic officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of a formal announcement, did not say who the panel will invite as witnesses, but they said it would feature legal experts who could speak about constitutional precedent and the history of impeachment.
Rip Murdock (ff876c) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:27 am…….
It only takes one rogue cow to start a stampede.
Russell (453b75) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:35 amIt may be something to do with Emerson and Rasmussen polls showing Trump’s approval with Black voters rising up to 34%.
If it was just Rasmussen, I’d discount the polls, but Emerson coming up with the same number is interesting.
Xmas (eafb47) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:42 amI distinctly remember right after Clinton gave his “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” denial.
There was a panel of talking heads, left and right, afterward and they all agreed with the assertion “If he’s lying, he’s gone.”
But when it turned out, after months of further denials, and slander aimed at the Independent Counsel, that he was, in fact, lying, somehow the goalposts had moved.
Dave (fcd131) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:49 amBreaking news after democrats in her district are standing in line to primary her she has changed back to voting for impeachment! Democrats are now like republican tea party and will primary anyone who strays from the party line.
asset (b71b38) — 11/26/2019 @ 12:02 pm”but they said it would feature legal experts who could speak about constitutional precedent and the history of impeachment.”
Rip Murdock (ff876c) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:27 am
I‘m not sure the Fonz on skis counts as a legal expert.
Munroe (dd6b64) — 11/26/2019 @ 12:05 pm#6
Not sure I agree with that.
Because with impeachment, GOP Senate gets a chance to cross-examine the Democrat’s position and to muddy the waters up more that would highlight the partisan efforts by democrats. Frankly, Trump will spin this as total exoneration and wear this as a badge of honor.
With Censure, Trump won’t get that same chance.
whembly (fd57f6) — 11/26/2019 @ 12:52 pmOnly two other presidents in our history have hit that level of disapproval, and that “impeached” label is attached to both of them forever.
It’s interesting that the REASON they wanted to get rid of Andrew Johnson (he was weak on Reconstruction) was much different than the charge (he dared to fire a cabinet member after Congress told him he couldn’t). That the charge was utter BS (he was within his rights) didn’t seem to matter.
Compare this to today, where the charge (whatever) is also disjoint from the reason (“unfit”).
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:05 pm#14: Good luck tying Bolton to the Ruskies.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:06 pmThe “press” isn’t spearheading anything; they’re generating content;
Sure, but all the “content” falls one way. Just chance, I guess.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:07 pm“high crimes and misdemeanors”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/misdemeanor-word-history-not-always-a-crime
The article goes on to describe how “misdemeanor” has become a legal term but that before the 19th century it was a vague term regarding misbehavior.
Does anyone really argue that Trump is innocent of misbehavior?
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:15 pmWhy this weird idea that Pelosi is some sort of moderate and is “The only adult in the Democratic room”? That’s all just wishful thinking. OF COURSE, impeaching trump is insane. OF COURSE, it will accomplish nothing. OF COURSE, its against all prior precedent and Congressional Tradition.
But so what? The D’s only care about one thing – does it help them. And they think by impeaching Trump it helps them. They know Trump isn’t going anywhere – but they want to damage him and stop him from doing anything positive legislatively.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:21 pm#25: and in fact when impeachment was discussed in the 1787 Convention, Franklin poined out that, in its absence the only way to remove an Executive was by assassination, which not only did not allow a trial but had a harsher sentence. Part of the idea was to allow a trial and the possibility of exoneration.
I believe that a member of the armed forces can accept a summary punishment or insist on a court martial for similar reasons. I wonder if the President can demand a trial — everyone else can.
Only one president (Jackson) has been censured, and the censure was expunged after Congress changed hands.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:21 pmWhy this weird idea that Pelosi is some sort of moderate
There are no moderates in either party in Congress. It’s bimodal. But Pelosi is noticeably closer to the center than the bulk of her party.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:24 pmNotice that Conservative Inc. and the Bulwark Boys are A-OK with impeaching a President with made up “Crimes” on a completely partisan basis. I thought all their big, intellectual conservatism, with its “What would Edmund Burke do”? underpinnings would make them angry at this abuse of Congressional Power.
It seems the only thing that get Conservative Inc. angry is: Trump, Right wingers, and a late paycheck from their corporate masters.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:25 pmUPDATE:
Dana (cb74ca) — 11/26/2019 @ 1:37 pmHow many war criminals do you need to pardon before you become one?
Dave (f06598) — 11/26/2019 @ 2:09 pm@34. The polls said he wouldn’t win, either– right up to the night he won.
They’re all over the lot– and these days, given the every-increasing value of information, good and bad, people just lie to pollsters. What’s in it for a person polled to cough up any data– truthful or otherwise- for free?
Poll me?
Pay me.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/26/2019 @ 2:10 pmWho are war criminals and what were their crimes?
NJRob (7f0cc5) — 11/26/2019 @ 2:31 pm@35. Where do you start and stop this nuttiness? Weaponizing impeachment has become the lazy-azzed politicians solution to everything.
Adams was unlikable sort; shudda impeached him; Johnson was unlikable, too- he was impeached; Grant was a drunk and surrounded by corruption; shudda been impeached. Taft was a burden to himself and every government bought chair he sat in: shudda impeached him; Wilson was from New Jersey- that alone rates impeachment; Hoover was dour and depressing: shudda impeached him. FDR knew about the concentration camps in Europe, interred American citizens and wore leg irons: shudda impeached him; Truman was a foulmouthed sunnuvabee, a bad role model for the young an nuked Japan: shudda impeached him; Ike ruined the Oval Office floor with his golf spikes-shudda impeached the putz; LBJ knew the war was a losing proposition w/PP in hand yet still sent tens of thousands of people to their deaths; shudda impeached him; Before Watergate, there was the Nixon-Chennault Affair that was outright treason; shudda impeached him in 1969; Reagan traded arms for hostages,dyed his hair, wore glasses and made lousy movies; shudda impeached him. Pappy Bush lied about taxes: shudda been impeached; Clinton lied about sex- he was impeached; Dubya lied about WMD- shudda been impeached; Obama drew a red line, ignored it and lied about ‘keeping your doctor;’- shudda been impeached. Now Trump is getting a thumping.
First dibs– Bloomberg is trying to buy the office; if he does: impeach him.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/26/2019 @ 2:38 pm@37
Trump grants clemency to troops in three controversial war crimes cases
President Donald Trump on Friday granted clemency to three controversial military figures embroiled in charges of war crimes, arguing the moves will give troops “the confidence to fight” without worrying about potential legal overreach.
Army 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, convicted of second degree murder in the death of two Afghans, was given a full pardon from president for the crimes. Army Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, who faced murder charges next year for a similar crime, was also given a full pardon for those alleged offenses.
Special Warfare Operator Chief Edward Gallagher, who earlier this fall was acquitted of a string of alleged war crimes, had his rank restored to Chief Petty Officer by the president.
….
While Gallagher was acquitted of murder and obstruction of justice charges in July, a panel of his peers recommended he be reduced in grade for posing with the body of a detainee, a crime he never denied.
Lorance’s case dates back to a 2012 deployment to Afghanistan, when he ordered his soldiers to fire on three unarmed men riding a motorcycle near their patrol. Members of his platoon testified against him at a court-martial trial, describing Lorance as over-zealous and the Afghans as posing no real threat.
He was sentenced to 19 years in prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. In recent years, Lorance and his family had waged a long campaign against his sentence, and found a receptive ear in Trump.
Golsteyn’s case had not yet been decided. He was scheduled for a December trial on charges he murdered an alleged Taliban bomb maker, and burned his remains in a trash pit during a 2010 deployment with 3rd Special Forces Group. Trump’s action effectively puts an end to that legal case before any verdicts were rendered. ….
Rip Murdock (ff876c) — 11/26/2019 @ 2:42 pmHow many murderers do have to pardon before you become one?
Asking for Obama.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/26/2019 @ 3:04 pmhttps://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/22/prosecution-suffers-massive-blows-navy-seal-eddie-gallagher/
mg (8cbc69) — 11/26/2019 @ 3:18 pmYou people ought to keep up.
36. DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/26/2019 @ 2:10 pm
Very few people nowadays anwer polls when randomly called – less than 10%.
https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2017/05/15/what-low-response-rates-mean-for-telephone-surveys
It had dropped to 36% by 1997 reached 25% by 2003, 15% in 2009 and was at 9% by 2012. And thats for live interviewers. Robo polls get less. This all probably has something to dowith the nuber of and type of calls people get.
The people who answer questions are different from the people who don’t. Or they are different when it comes to political opinion. More of them lean Democrat for one thing. More of them are the sort of people who volunteer.
The numbers need to be adjusted or weighed, and that is an art, not a science.
The results get weighed according to how they answer other questions with known statistics, often demographic, (age sex and race) but that’s not enough.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-polling-industry-in-stasis-or-in-crisis (Aug 24, 2014)`
Boldface mine. What they’re tweaking is their model.
This hapepns with econoic and climate models that are fotted to past data, and wth stock market models.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 11/26/2019 @ 3:19 pmThe only opinions and votes that count are our 100 senators.
dunce (4848a5) — 11/26/2019 @ 4:48 pm43. They have to, in the long run, answer to the public.
Sammy Finkelman (1a8726) — 11/26/2019 @ 5:18 pmI think at this point elections should just be abandoned, and the supreme court run the country.
And by supreme court, of course I mean Patterico. Reagan was wrong, the people can’t be trusted to get it right.
lee (f8d029) — 11/26/2019 @ 6:22 pmAnd again, Trump’s approval rating has been almost point-for-point with Obama’s at the same time in his term. I really don’t understand why people keep bringing his tepid approval numbers up as if they were some kind of outliers.
OK, maybe I do understand.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 6:41 pmHow many war criminals do you need to pardon before you become one?
How many drug dealers and embezzlers do you need to pardon before you become one? Whatever Trump’s misdeeds with the pardon power, they aren’t unique.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 6:44 pmYou cannot become a murderer, drug dealer or embezzler by pardoning someone who committed those crimes.
But shielding enough war criminals from accountability could make you a war criminal.
Dave (fcd131) — 11/26/2019 @ 6:51 pmYou might as well say that you can become a war criminal by being an attorney for war criminals.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 7:58 pmIf the attorney procures or induces unlawful command influence, why not?
nk (dbc370) — 11/26/2019 @ 8:03 pmThis sh!t that the orange is doing is expressly forbidden by the USCOMJ. But who is going to challenge it and where? If he were doing it against the defendants, they could raise it in their court martial. Here, it could only be handled by way of impeachment and criminal indictment after he leaves office. Rotsa ruck with that.
nk (dbc370) — 11/26/2019 @ 8:09 pm*USCMJ*
nk (dbc370) — 11/26/2019 @ 8:10 pmLet’s not forget the impeachment between Johnson and Trump, which is Clinton. Republicans were looking for all kinds of ways to impeach him because he was such a lying sleazebag, and then the Lewinsky Unpleasantness fell into their laps.
Paul Montagu (00daa1) — 11/26/2019 @ 8:37 pmWithout Googling, do you know how many presidents have been censured and why? With impeachment, the history is much more known, right?
Paul Montagu (00daa1) — 11/26/2019 @ 8:40 pmYes, as I mentioned it before. Andrew Jackson was censured for shutting down the central bank. It was later expunged. I think it was by the Senate.
There have been other attempts, and other reprimands that did not amount to a formal censure.
(and now that I look it up)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censure_in_the_United_States
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:29 pmIf the attorney procures or induces unlawful command influence, why not?
A pardon is never “unlawful” command influence. It’s a plenary power.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:31 pmOTOH, it could be claimed that the US has failed to prosecute war crimes due to the pardon(s) and that those pardoned could be tried in another venue.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/26/2019 @ 11:39 pmAnd…
under the bus goes Rudy:
Allahpundit wryly observes:
Meanwhile, in the real world, his “transcript” of the infamous Zelensky call still reads:
Dave (1bb933) — 11/27/2019 @ 12:37 amI question her sincerity but if I thought she was sincere and not merely pragmatic I’d be pretty impressed. I watched the Clinton impeachment and still find it the stupidest thing in US politics I’ve ever seen, and the country’s attention was diverted from more important matters. It made me re-think Nixon.
I can’t see the upside of impeaching a president with less than a year before an election when he can’t pass any legislation without the Dems agreeing. I have a bit of self-interest here since I’ve been happy with Trump’s judicial appointments so who knows how much that colors my comments? But still, even if her change of heart is for the wrong reasons, as I think is more likely, I agree with her position. How odd.
Lazlo Toth (cbb623) — 11/27/2019 @ 10:28 amI didn’t direct Rudy’s work in Ukraine, Trump claims
Something Rudy’s attorney could argue is exculpatory.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/27/2019 @ 11:49 amI can’t see the upside of impeaching a president with less than a year before an election when he can’t pass any legislation without the Dems agreeing.
It’s counting coup, and red meat for your partisans. And since the partisans are DEMANDING red meat, you’d better toss them some.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/27/2019 @ 11:51 am39. While Gallagher was acquitted of murder and obstruction of justice charges in July, a panel of his peers recommended he be reduced in grade for posing with the body of a detainee, a crime he never denied.</em
That panel of peers is convened at the discretion of the commanding officer/s. It is fully optional. Since, we know the prosecution was corrupt, and the brass involved in this show trial are suspect, a safe assumption is the panel of peers was under threat to "do the right thing."
iowan2 (9c8856) — 11/27/2019 @ 6:17 pm