Republicans kick off President Joe Biden’s impeachment inquiry
By Casey Harper | The Center Square U.S. House Republicans launched the first impeachment inquiry Thursday into President Joe Biden, who faces an array of allegations around bribery and financial impropriety related to personal business dealings spearheaded by his son, Hunter Biden. Republicans say they have significant evidence to back allegations that Hunter Biden received more than $20 million from several overseas entities in China, Ukraine, Russia, and more. Hunter also faces gun and tax-related legal difficulties. The impeachment inquiry, though, forces Republicans to focus on how much President Biden, in particular, was involved and benefited from these alleged dealings as Democrats argue the evidence is lacking. “Evidence reveals that then-Vice President Joe Biden spoke, dined, and developed relationships with his family’s foreign business targets,” House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., said in his opening statement, referring in part to testimony from IRS whistleblowers and long-time business associate of Hunter Biden, Devon Archer. “These business targets include foreign oligarchs who sent millions of dollars to his family,” Comer added. “It also includes a Chinese national who wired a quarter of a million dollars to his son.” The wire in question from a Chinese national broke headlines this week and added further weight to the allegations against the president. Comer said this week that multiple wire transfers from Chinese nationals listed the president’s home address in Wilmington, Delaware, as the beneficiary address. “This happened when Joe Biden was running for President of the United States. And Joe Biden’s home is listed as the beneficiary address,” Comer said. “To date, the House Oversight Committee has uncovered how the Bidens and their associates created over 20 shell companies – most of which were created when Joe Biden was Vice President – and raked in over $24 million between 2014 to 2019. “We’ve also identified nine members of the Biden family who have participated in or benefited from these business schemes,” Comer added. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who launched the impeachment inquiry earlier this month, referenced those wire transfers when speaking with reporters ahead of the hearing. “While Joe Biden was running for president and told, and his attorney told too, that they received no money from China, we now know that yes, it came from Beijing,” McCarthy said. “It came from Jonathan Li, and the address on the wire is Joe Biden’s address. And then you find out, how did he meet this Jonathan Li? Well, he took Hunter Biden on Air Force Two when he went to China, and then Hunter had him meet the vice president then. “The vice president … he wrote letters of recommendation for his children too,” McCarthy added. The House Ways and Means Committee also released documents and communications earlier this week, including one with Hunter Biden “bragging in a 2017 email to a Chinese business executive that he negotiated a contract for $10 million per year for ‘introductions alone.’” Democrats remained steadfast during the hearing, arguing that there is no evidence against President Biden, specifically. U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the ranking member on the committee, called it “preposterous,” and a “fairy tale.” “They’ve got nothing on Joe Biden,” Raskin said, arguing that former President Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani sparked this “conspiracy theory.” They also pointed to the indictments facing former President Donald Trump, who faces 91 charges across several states and from the federal government for his handling of classified documents, alleged ‘hush money’ payments to an adult film star, and his role in allegedly working to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. “It’s scandalous to use impeachment to establish a counterfeit moral equivalence between President Biden, an honorable public servant who has never been indicted or convicted of anything in his career of more than 50 years in public life,” Raskin said. “…and Donald Trump, a twice impeached president who’s recently been found in court to have sexually abused and defamed a woman and fraudulently inflated the value of his real estate properties…” Democrats also blasted Republicans for focusing on impeachment when the federal government is just days away from shutting down if Congress does not pass a new spending measure. “They are wasting time and taxpayer dollars in an illegitimate impeachment inquiry when we’re about 48 away or so from an extreme MAGA Republican government shutdown, and this is what they’re focused on?” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., told reporters. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Republicans expand their Hunter Biden investigation by seeking an interview with the lead prosecutor
House Republicans on Thursday requested voluntary testimony from nearly a dozen Justice Department officials involved in the investigation of President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden as GOP lawmakers widen their scrutiny into what they claim is improper interference by the agency. Leaders of the Republican-controlled House Judiciary, Oversight and Accountability, and Ways and Means committees asked in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland for nine officials from the Justice Department and two from the FBI to appear for the interviews to address recent allegations made by two IRS employees who worked on the federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s taxes and foreign business dealings. “Recent startling testimony from Internal Revenue Services whistleblowers raises serious questions about the Department’s commitment to evenhanded justice and the veracity of assertions made to the Committee on the Judiciary,” Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, James Comer of Kentucky, and Jason Smith of Missouri wrote in the letter obtained by The Associated Press. The individuals named in the letter include David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware in charge of the investigation, as well Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf of Delaware and the top federal prosecutor for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves. Garland said last week that the Justice Department will not object to Weiss testifying to Congress. A department spokesperson confirmed receipt of the letter but declined further comment. The request comes about a week after Biden, 53, reached an agreement with the government to plead guilty to misdemeanor tax offenses. The plea deal would also avert prosecution on a felony charge of illegally possessing a firearm as a drug user, as long as Biden adheres to conditions agreed to in court. Days later, the House Ways and Means Committee, led by Smith, voted to publicly disclose congressional testimony from the IRS employees. The testimony from Greg Shapley and an unidentified agent detailed what they called a pattern of “slow-walking investigative steps” and delaying enforcement actions in the months before the 2020 election won by Joe Biden. It is unclear whether the conflict they describe amounts to internal disagreement about how to pursue the investigation or a pattern of interference and preferential treatment. Department policy has long warned prosecutors to take care in charging cases with potential political overtones around the time of an election, to avoid influencing the outcome. The Justice Department has denied the claims and said Weiss, appointed to his job when Donald Trump was president, had full authority over the case. The letter provided a deadline of July 13 for the department to begin scheduling the individuals for transcribed interviews. It said that if the deadline is not met, the committee chairmen will resort to using a congressional subpoena to force cooperation. Beyond Hunter Biden, the House Oversight and Accountability Committee led by Comer has undertaken a broader review of the Biden family’s finances and foreign dealings, issuing dozens of subpoenas to business associates and financial institutions. Republicans have focused much attention on an unverified tip to the FBI that alleged a bribery scheme involving Joe Biden when he was vice president. The unsubstantiated claim, which first emerged in 2019, was that Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor in order to stop an investigation into Burisma, an oil-and-gas company where Hunter Biden was on the board. Democrats said in a letter Thursday to Comer that the Justice Department investigated the claim when Trump was president and closed the matter after eight months, finding “insufficient evidence” that it was true. Democrats highlighted the transcript of an interview with Mykola Zlochevsky, Burisma’s co-founder, in which he denied having any contact with Joe Biden while Hunter Biden worked for the company. “Mr. Zlochevsky’s statements are just one of the many that have debunked the corruption allegations,” said the committee’s top Democrat, Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
House censures Rep. Adam Schiff over Trump-Russia investigations
The House voted Wednesday to censure California Rep. Adam Schiff for comments he made several years ago about investigations into Donald Trump’s ties to Russia, rebuking the Democrat and frequent critic of the former president along party lines. Schiff, who will stand in front of the House while the resolution is read, becomes the 25th House lawmaker to be censured. He was defiant ahead of the vote, saying he will wear the formal disapproval as a “badge of honor” and charged his GOP colleagues of doing the former president’s bidding. “I will not yield,” Schiff, who is running for the Senate in his home state, said during debate over the measure. “Not one inch.” More than 20 Republicans voted with Democrats last week to block the censure resolution, but they changed their votes this week after the measure’s sponsor, Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, removed a provision that could have fined Schiff $16 million if the House Ethics Committee determined he lied. Several of the Republicans who opposed the resolution last week said they opposed fining a member of Congress in that manner. The final vote was 213-209. The revised resolution says Schiff held positions of power during Trump’s presidency and “abused this trust by saying there was evidence of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.” Schiff was one of the most outspoken critics of the former president as both the Justice Department and the Republican-led House launched investigations into Trump’s ties to Russia in 2017. Both investigations concluded that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election but neither found evidence of a criminal conspiracy. “Representative Schiff purposely deceived his Committee, Congress, and the American people,” the resolution said. Schiff, the former Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and the lead prosecutor in Trump’s first impeachment trial, has long been a top Republican political target. Soon after taking back the majority this year, Republicans blocked him from sitting on the intelligence panel. The House has only censured two other lawmakers in the last 20 years. Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona was censured in 2021 for tweeting an animated video that depicted him striking Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., with a sword. Former Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel of New York was censured in 2010 for serious financial and campaign misconduct. The censure itself carries no practical effect, except to provide a historic footnote that marks a lawmaker’s career. But the GOP resolution would also launch an ethics investigation into Schiff’s conduct. While Schiff did not initiate the 2017 congressional investigation into Trump’s Russia ties — then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, a Republican who later became one of Trump’s most ardent defenders, started it — Republicans arguing in favor of his censure Wednesday blamed him for what they said was the fallout of that probe, and of the separate investigation started that same year by Trump’s own Justice Department. Luna said that Schiff’s comments that there was evidence against Trump “ripped apart American families across the country” and that he was “permanently destroying family relationships.” Several blamed him for the more than $30 million spent by then-special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the Justice Department probe. Schiff said the censure resolution “would accuse me of omnipotence, the leader of some a vast Deep State conspiracy, and of course, it is nonsense.” Democrats aggressively defended their colleague. Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, who led Trump’s second impeachment, called the effort an “embarrassing revenge tour on behalf of Donald Trump.” Mueller, who led the two-year Justice Department investigation, determined that Russia intervened on the campaign’s behalf and that Trump’s campaign welcomed the help. But Mueller’s team did not find that the campaign conspired to sway the election, and the Justice Department did not recommend any criminal charges. The House intelligence committee probe launched by Nunes similarly found that Russia intervened in the election but that there was no evidence of a criminal conspiracy. Schiff was the top Democrat on the panel at the time. Schiff said last week that the censure resolution was “red meat” that Speaker Kevin McCarthy was throwing to his conference amid squabbles over government spending. Republicans are trying to show their fealty to Trump, Schiff said. He said he warned the country during impeachment proceedings three years ago that Trump “would go on to do worse. And, of course, he did worse in the form of a violent attack on the Capitol.” After Democrats won the House majority in 2018, the House impeached Trump for abuse of power after he threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine and urged the country’s president to investigate then-candidate Joe Biden. Schiff was the lead House prosecutor making the case for conviction to the Senate, arguing repeatedly that “right matters.” The Republican-led chamber ultimately acquitted him. Trump was impeached a second time a year later, after he had left office, for his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol. The Senate again acquitted Trump. In the censure resolution against Schiff, Luna also cited a report released in May from special counsel John Durham that found that the FBI rushed into its investigation of Trump’s campaign and relied too much on raw and unconfirmed intelligence. Durham said investigators repeatedly relied on “confirmation bias,” ignoring or rationalizing away evidence that undercut their premise of a Trump-Russia conspiracy as they pushed the probe forward. But he did not allege that political bias or partisanship were guiding factors for the FBI’s actions. Trump had claimed that Durham’s report would reveal the “crime of the century” and expose a “deep state conspiracy” by high-ranking government officials to derail his candidacy and later his presidency. But the investigation yielded only one conviction — a guilty plea from a little-known FBI employee — and the only two other cases that were brought both ended in acquittals at trial. On Wednesday, just before the vote, Schiff’s campaign sent out a fundraising email that said Luna had introduced “yet ANOTHER resolution to censure me.” “The vote and debate will happen imminently,” the email read,
Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin says he’s been diagnosed with lymphoma
Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin said Wednesday that he has a type of lymphoma that’s a “serious but curable form of cancer” and is beginning several months of treatment. Raskin, who will be the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Reform Committee in the next Congress, said he expects to be able to work through his outpatient treatment at a Washington-area hospital. In a statement Wednesday, Raskin said he has diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and the “prognosis for most people in my situation is excellent after four months of treatment.” He said he has been advised his chemotherapy treatment will cause hair loss and weight gain. “I am still holding out hope for the kind that causes hair gain and weight loss,” he joked. Raskin has played a leading role in recent years as House Democrats twice impeached then-President Donald Trump and investigated Trump’s role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection. He was the lead impeachment manager when the House impeached Trump one week after the attack, and he currently sits on the House committee investigating the siege. That panel issued its final report last week and is set to dissolve when the new Republican-led House is sworn in on January 3. This is the second time the Maryland Democrat has been diagnosed with cancer, as he previously battled colorectal cancer in 2010. The news comes almost exactly two years after his 25-year-old son, Tommy, committed suicide on December 31, 2020. Tommy’s death came just a week before the insurrection, and Raskin had brought his daughter and son-in-law to the Capitol that day. Through tears, Raskin spoke about their ordeal as he argued for Trump’s conviction in the Senate impeachment trial. The two hid under a desk as the violence unfolded, and his daughter later told him she didn’t want to return to the Capitol. “Of all the terrible, brutal things I saw and I heard on that day, and since then, that one hit me the hardest,” Raskin told the Senate jurors, who later acquitted Trump for a second time. Raskin wrote a book, “Unthinkable,” about working through his trauma from both events. Of his most recent trial, Raskin says, “I plan to get through this and, in the meantime, to keep making progress every day in Congress for American democracy.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
House to vote on election law overhaul in response to January 6
The House pushed ahead Wednesday with legislation that would revamp the rules for certifying the results of a presidential election as lawmakers accelerate their response to the January 6, 2021, insurrection and Donald Trump’s failed attempt to remain in power. The legislation would overhaul an arcane 1800s-era statute known as the Electoral Count Act that governs, along with the U.S. Constitution, how states and Congress certify electors and declare presidential election winners. The House planned a vote on the bill after afternoon debate. While that process has long been routine and ceremonial, Trump and a group of his aides and lawyers tried to exploit loopholes in the law in an attempt to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election. The bill would set new parameters around the January 6 joint session of Congress that happens every four years after a presidential election. The day turned violent last year after hundreds of Trump’s supporters interrupted the proceedings, broke into the building, and threatened the lives of then-Vice President Mike Pence and members of Congress. The rioters echoed Trump’s false claims of widespread fraud and wanted Pence to block Democrat Joe Biden’s victory as he presided over the joint session. The legislation intends to ensure that future Jan. 6 sessions are “as the constitution envisioned, a ministerial day,” said Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, a Republican who co-sponsored the legislation with House Administration Committee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. Both Cheney and Lofgren are also members of the House committee investigating the January 6 attack. Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, another member of the January 6 panel, said during the start of the House debate that the bill would modernize the elections law “to make sure that the will of the people is vindicated at every level.” The bill, which is similar to legislation moving through the Senate, would clarify in the law that the vice president’s role presiding over the count is only ceremonial and also sets out that each state can only send one certified set of electors. Trump’s allies had unsuccessfully tried to put together alternate slates of illegitimate pro-Trump electors in swing states where Biden won. The legislation would increase the threshold for individual lawmakers’ objections to any state’s electoral votes, requiring a third of the House and a third of the Senate to object to trigger votes on the results in both chambers. Currently, only one lawmaker in the House and one lawmaker in the Senate have to object. The House bill would set out very narrow grounds for those objections, an attempt to thwart baseless or politically motivated challenges. The legislation also would require courts to get involved if state or local officials want to delay a presidential vote or refuse to certify the results. The House vote comes as the Senate is moving on a similar track with enough Republican support to virtually ensure passage before the end of the year. After months of talks, House Democrats introduced the legislation on Monday and are holding a quick vote two days later in order to send the bill across the Capitol and start to resolve differences. A bipartisan group of senators introduced legislation this summer, and a Senate committee is expected to vote on it next week. While the House bill is more expansive than the Senate version, the two bills cover similar ground, and members in both chambers are optimistic that they can work out the differences. While few House Republicans are expected to vote for the legislation — most are still allied with Trump — supporters are encouraged by the bipartisan effort in the Senate. “Both sides have an incentive to want a set of clear rules, and this is an antiquated law that no one understands,” said Benjamin Ginsburg, a longtime GOP lawyer who consulted with lawmakers as they wrote the bill. “All parties benefit from clarity.” House GOP leaders disagree and are encouraging their members to vote against the legislation. They say the involvement of courts could drag out elections and that the bill would take rights away from states. The bill is an “attempt to federalize our elections,” Rep. Guy Reschenthaler, R-Pa., said on the House floor. He argued that voters are more focused on the economy and other issues than on elections law. “In my area of Pennsylvania, nobody is talking about this,” Reschenthaler said. Illinois Rep. Rodney Davis, Lofgren’s GOP counterpart on the House Administration Committee, said Tuesday that Democrats are “desperately trying to talk about their favorite topic, and that is former president Donald Trump.” Democrats said the bill was not only a response to Trump but also a way to prevent objections and mischief from all candidates in the future. “If you think that this legislation is an attack on President Trump, you simply haven’t read the legislation because there’s nothing in there attacking President Trump,” Raskin said. “This is about reforming the Electoral Count Act, so it works for the American people.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Capitol riot hearings to stretch into July, chairman says
The House’s January 6 committee plans to continue its public hearings into July as its investigation of the Capitol riot deepens. The chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, told reporters Wednesday that the committee is receiving “a lot of information” — including new documentary film footage of Donald Trump’s final months in office — as its yearlong inquiry intensifies with hearings into the attack on January 6, 2021, and Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election that Democrat Joe Biden won. Thompson, D-Miss., said the committee’s Thursday hearing, which is set to highlight former Justice Department officials testifying about Trump’s proposals to reject the election results, would wrap up this month’s work. The committee would start up again in July. “We have a new documentary from a person that we’re talking to, and we got to look through all his information,” Thompson said, referring to the British filmmaker whose never-before-seen interviews with the former president and his inner circle were turned over to the committee this week. The footage was taken both before and after the insurrection. For the past year, the committee has been investigating the violence at the Capitol and its causes and has interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses and produced some 140,000 documents. Nine people died in the attack and its aftermath. The committee had been scheduled to conclude this first round of public hearings in June. But additional information has come to the committee’s attention, and Congress is set to recess for two weeks of remote and district work into the Fourth of July holiday. The revelation about the film came to light Tuesday when British filmmaker Alex Holder revealed he had complied with a congressional subpoena to turn over all of the footage he shot in the final weeks of Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., indicated on Tuesday that the investigation’s schedule may be changing. “I would just say the original hearings would have wrapped up in June, but we are picking up new evidence on a daily basis with enormous velocity,” Raskin said. “And so we’re constantly incorporating and including the new information that’s coming out.” He added: “But certainly, the hearings will conclude before the end of the summer.” The televised hearings launched with a prime-time session this month, and lawmakers said they continue uncovering new tips and information. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Joe Biden banning Russia from U.S. airspace because of Ukraine
President Joe Biden will vow to make Vladimir Putin “pay a price” for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in his first State of the Union address, rallying allies abroad while also outlining his plans at home to fight inflation and the fading but still dangerous coronavirus. In addition to recounting U.S. and allied economic sanctions against Russia, Biden planned to announce that the U.S. is following Canada and the European Union in banning Russian planes from its airspace in retaliation for the invasion of Ukraine, according to two people familiar with his remarks’ They spoke only on the condition of anonymity before the speech. Biden planned in his Tuesday night remarks to highlight the bravery of Ukrainian defenders and the resolve of a newly reinvigorated Western alliance that has worked to rearm the Ukrainian military and cripple Russia’s economy through sanctions. He was set to deliver an ominous warning that without consequences, Russian President Putin’s aggression wouldn’t be contained to Ukraine. “Throughout our history, we’ve learned this lesson – when dictators do not pay a price for their aggression, they cause more chaos,” Biden was to say, according to advance excerpts released by the White House. “They keep moving. And, the costs and threats to America and the world keep rising.” Even before the Russian invasion sent energy costs skyrocketing, prices for American families had been rising, and the COVID-19 pandemic continues to hurt families and the country’s economy. Biden planned to outline plans to address inflation by reinvesting in American manufacturing capacity, speeding supply chains, and reducing the burden of childcare and eldercare on workers. “We have a choice,” Biden was to say. “One way to fight inflation is to drive down wages and make Americans poorer. I have a better plan to fight inflation. Lower your costs, not your wages.” Set against disquiet at home and danger abroad, the White House had conceived Tuesday night’s speech as an opportunity to highlight the improving coronavirus outlook, rebrand Biden’s domestic policy priorities, and show a path to lower costs for families grappling with soaring inflation. But it has taken on new significance with last week’s Russian invasion of Ukraine and nuclear saber-rattling by Putin. In an interview with CNN and Reuters, Zelenskyy said he urged Biden to deliver a strong and “useful” message about Russia’s invasion. Ahead of the speech, the White House announced that Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S. Oksana Markarova would join first lady Jill Biden in the galleries to watch Biden’s address. Biden will address a mask-optional crowd in the House chamber, one sign of the easing coronavirus threat. But he’ll also speak from within a newly fenced Capitol due to renewed security concerns after last year’s insurrection. Rising energy prices as a result of Russia’s war in Ukraine risk exacerbating inflation in the U.S., which is already at the highest level in 40 years, eating into people’s earnings and threatening the economic recovery from the pandemic. And while the geopolitical crisis in Eastern Europe may have helped to cool partisan tensions in Washington, it can’t erase the political and cultural discord that is casting doubt on Biden’s ability to deliver on his pledge to promote national unity. Biden is speaking to an American public that is frustrated with his performance. A February AP-NORC poll found that more people disapproved than approved of how Biden is handling his job, 55% to 44%. That’s down from a 60% favorable rating last July. White House officials acknowledge the mood of the country is “sour,” citing the lingering pandemic and inflation. Biden, in his speech, will highlight progress from a year ago — with the majority of the U.S. population now vaccinated and millions more people at work — but also acknowledge that the job is not yet done, a recognition of American discontent. Biden aides say they believe the national psyche is a “trailing indicator” that will improve with time. But time is running short for the president, who needs to salvage his first-term agenda to revive the political fortunes of his party before November’s midterm elections. House Republicans say the word “crisis” describes the state of the union under Biden and Democrats — from an energy policy that lets Russia sell oil abroad to challenges at home over jobs and immigration. “We’re going to push the president to do the right thing,” said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. At least a half dozen lawmakers, including Reps. Jamie Raskin and Pete Aguilar, both members of the committee investigating last year’s Capitol riot, and Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., had tested positive for COVID-19 and were not expected at the Capitol for the speech. Where his speech to Congress last year saw the rollout of a massive social spending package, Biden plans this year to repackage past proposals in search of achievable measures he hopes can win bipartisan support in a bitterly divided Congress before the elections. The president was to highlight investments in everything from internet broadband access to bridge construction from November’s $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure law as an example of government reaching consensus and delivering change for the nation. He also planned to appeal to lawmakers to compromise on rival competitiveness bills that have passed the House and Senate; both meant to revitalize high-tech American manufacturing and supply chains in the face of growing geopolitical threats from China. The speech comes as progress on many of Biden’s other legislative priorities remains stalled on Capitol Hill after Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin scuttled the sweeping “Build Back Better” spending bill that Biden championed last fall. As part of his pitch to voters, Biden was to resurrect components of the legislation, but with a new emphasis on how proposals like extending the child tax credit and bringing down child care costs could bring relief to families as prices rise. He was also to outline how his climate change proposals would cut costs for lower- and middle-income families and create new jobs. Jen Psaki said Biden “will absolutely use the word inflation” in the speech but emphasized that he was
House votes to create panel to probe Jan. 6 insurrection
The House voted Wednesday to create an independent commission on the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, sending the legislation to an uncertain future in the Senate as Republicans increasingly line up against the bipartisan investigation and align themselves with former President Donald Trump. Democrats say an independent investigation is crucial to reckoning what happened that day when a violent mob of Trump’s supporters smashed into the Capitol to try and overturn President Joe Biden’s victory. Modeled after the investigation into the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the legislation would establish an independent, 10-member commission that would make recommendations by the end of the year for securing the Capitol and preventing another insurrection. It passed the House 252-175. But top Republicans in Congress are working to stop it. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday morning that he will oppose the legislation, joining with House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy, who came out against it Tuesday. Both men claimed the bill was partisan, even though membership of the proposed commission would be evenly split between the parties. The January insurrection has become an increasingly fraught topic for Republicans, with a growing number in the party downplaying the severity of the worst attack on the Capitol in more than 200 years. While most Republicans voted against forming the commission, only a few spoke on the floor against it. And a handful of Republicans who backed the commission spoke forcefully. “This is about facts — it’s not partisan politics,” said New York Rep. John Katko, the top Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee who negotiated the legislation with Democrats. He said, “the American people and the Capitol Police deserve answers, and action as soon as possible to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.” Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., said that Jan. 6 “is going to haunt this institution for a long, long time” and that a commission is necessary to find the truth about what happened. He recalled that he “heard the shouts, saw the flash-bangs, smelled the gas on that sorry day.” Democrats grew angry as some Republicans suggested the commission was only intended to smear Trump. Several shared their own memories of the insurrection, when rioters brutally beat police, broke in through windows and doors, and sent lawmakers running. Four of the rioters died, including a woman who was shot and killed by police as she tried to break into the House chamber. A Capitol Police officer collapsed and died after engaging with the protesters, and two officers took their own lives in the days after. “We have people scaling the Capitol, hitting the Capitol Police with lead pipes across the head, and we can’t get bipartisanship? What else has to happen in this country?” shouted Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, on the floor just before the vote. He said the GOP opposition is “a slap in the face to every rank and file cop in the United States.” The vote was yet another test of Republican loyalty to Trump, whose grip on the party remains strong despite his election defeat. House Republicans booted Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney from their leadership last week for her criticism of Trump’s false claims, installing a Trump loyalist in her place. Cheney, in turn, suggested to ABC News that a commission could subpoena McCarthy because he spoke to Trump during the insurrection. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called McCarthy’s opposition to the commission “cowardice.” She released a February letter from the GOP leader in which he asked for an even split of Democrats and Republican commissioners, equal subpoena power, and no predetermined findings or conclusions. The bipartisan legislation accommodates all three of those requests, she said. “Leader McCarthy won’t take yes for an answer,” she said. In the Senate, McConnell’s announcement dimmed the prospects for passage. But Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., vowed to force a vote on the bill, charging that Republicans are “caving” to Trump. Schumer said that Republicans are trying to “sabotage the commission” and are “drunk” off Trump’s baseless claim that the election was stolen from him. That false assertion, repeated by the mob as the rioters broke into the Capitol, has been rebuked by numerous courts, bipartisan election officials across the country, and Trump’s own attorney general. Trump released a statement Tuesday night urging Republicans to oppose the commission, calling it a “Democrat trap.” Like in the House, some Senate Republicans have suggested they will support the legislation. Utah Sen. Mitt Romney said Tuesday that given the violent attack, “we should understand what mistakes were made and how we could prevent them from happening again.” Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy said he doesn’t agree with McConnell that the bill is slanted toward Democrats and “I’m inclined to support it.” Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican, said that she supports the idea of a commission but that the House bill would need adjustments. Others have pushed their colleagues to oppose the commission. Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, the top Republican on the Senate Rules Committee, is working on a report with his Democratic colleagues that will include recommendations for security upgrades. He said an independent investigation would take too long and “frankly, I don’t think there are that many gaps to be filled in on what happened on Jan. 6, as it relates to building security.” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, cited concern in the caucus that the investigation could be “weaponized politically” in the 2022 election cycle. “I want our midterm message to be about the kinds of issues that the American people are dealing with,” Thune said. “It’s jobs and wages and the economy, national security, safe streets, strong borders and those types of issues, and not relitigating the 2020 election.” Separately Wednesday, aides to Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., circulated a letter they said was from a group of around 40-50 anonymous U.S. Capitol Police officers who had been speaking with the congressman. “It is inconceivable that some of the Members we
Donald Trump trial video shows vast scope, danger of Capitol riot
Prosecutors unveiled chilling new security video in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial on Wednesday, showing the mob of rioters breaking into the Capitol, smashing windows and doors, and searching menacingly for Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as overwhelmed police begged on their radios for help. In the previously unreleased recordings, the House prosecutors displayed gripping scenes of how close the rioters were to the country’s leaders, roaming the halls chanting “Hang Mike Pence,” some equipped with combat gear. Outside, the mob had set up a makeshift gallows. Videos of the siege have been circulating since the day of the riot, but the graphic compilation amounted to a more complete narrative, a moment-by-moment retelling of one of the nation’s most alarming days. In addition to the evident chaos and danger, it offered fresh details on the attackers, scenes of police heroism, and cries of distress. And it showed just how close the country came to a potential breakdown in its seat of democracy as Congress was certifying Trump’s election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden. “They did it because Donald Trump sent them on this mission,” said House prosecutor Stacey Plaskett, the Democratic delegate representing the U.S. Virgin Islands. “His mob broke into the Capitol to hunt them down.” The stunning presentation opened the first full day of arguments in the trial as the prosecutors argued Trump was no “innocent bystander” but rather the “inciter in chief” of the deadly Capitol riot, a president who spent months spreading election lies and building a mob of supporters primed for his call to stop Biden’s victory. Though most of the Senate jurors have already made up their minds on acquittal or conviction, they were riveted and sat silently. Screams from the audio and video filled the Senate chamber. Senators shook their heads, folded their arms, and furrowed their brows. One Republican, James Lankford of Oklahoma, bent his head, a GOP colleague putting his hand on his arm in comfort. “On Jan. 6, President Trump left everyone in this Capitol for dead,” said Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, a prosecutor. Pence, who had been presiding over a session to certify Biden’s victory over Trump — thus earning Trump’s criticism — is shown being rushed to safety, sheltered in an office with his family just 100 feet from the rioters. Pelosi was evacuated from the complex before the mob prowls her suite of offices, her staff hiding quietly behind closed doors. At one dramatic moment, the video shows police shooting into the crowd through a broken window, killing a San Diego woman, Ashli Babbitt. In another, a police officer is seen being crushed by the mob. Police overwhelmed by the rioters frantically announce “we lost the line” and urge officers to safety. One officer later died. Some senators acknowledged it was the first time they had grasped how perilously close the country came to serious danger. “When you see all the pieces come together, just the total awareness of that, the enormity of this threat, not just to us as people, as lawmakers, but the threat to the institution and what Congress represents, it’s disturbing,” said Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. “Greatly disturbing.” Trump is the first president to face an impeachment trial after leaving office and the first to be twice impeached. He is charged with incitement of insurrection through fiery words his defense lawyers say are protected by the Constitution’s First Amendment and just figures of speech. The House Democrats showed piles of evidence from the former president himself — hundreds of Trump tweets and comments that culminated in his Jan. 6 rally cry to go to the Capitol and “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat. Trump then did nothing to stem the violence and watched with “glee,” they said, as the mob ransacked the iconic building. “To us, it may have felt like chaos and madness, but there was method to the madness that day,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the lead prosecutor, who pointed to Trump as the instigator. “And when his mob overran and occupied the Senate and attacked the House and assaulted law enforcement, he watched it on TV like a reality show. He reveled in it.” In one scene, a Capitol Police officer redirects Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, down a hallway to avoid the mob. It was the same officer, Eugene Goodman, who has been praised as a hero for having lured rioters away from the Senate doors. “It tears at your heart and brings tears to your eyes,” Romney said after watching the video. He said he didn’t realize how close he had been to danger. The day’s proceedings unfolded after Tuesday’s emotional start that left the former president fuming when his attorneys delivered a meandering defense and failed to halt the trial on constitutional grounds. Some allies called for yet another shakeup to his legal team. The prosecutors are arguing that Trump’s words were part of “the big lie” — his relentless efforts to sow doubts about the election results, revving up his followers to “stop the steal” even though there was no evidence of substantial fraud. Trump knew very well what would happen when he took to the microphone at the outdoor White House rally that day as Congress gathered to certify Biden’s win, said Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo, another impeachment manager. “This was not just a speech,” he said. Security remained extremely tight Wednesday at the Capitol, fenced off and patrolled by National Guard troops. White House press secretary Jen Psaki has said Biden would not be watching the trial. The difficulty facing Trump’s defenders became apparent at the start as they leaned on the process of the trial rather than the substance of the case against him. They said the Constitution doesn’t allow impeachment at this late date after he has left the White House. Even though the Senate rejected that argument in Tuesday’s vote to proceed, the legal issue could resonate with Republicans eager to acquit Trump without being seen as condoning his behavior. Defense
Donald Trump trial gets go-ahead after emotional, graphic first day
House prosecutors on Tuesday wrenched senators and the nation back to the deadly attack on Congress as they opened Donald Trump’s historic second impeachment trial with graphic video of the insurrection and Trump’s own calls for a rally crowd to march to the iconic building and “fight like hell” against his reelection defeat. The detailed and emotional presentation by Democrats was followed by meandering and occasionally confrontational arguments from the Trump defense team, which insisted that his remarks were protected by the First Amendment and asserted that he cannot be convicted as a former president. Even Trump’s backers in the Senate winced, several saying his lawyers were not helpful to his case. The senators sitting as jurors, many of whom fled for safety themselves the day of the attack, watched and listened, unable to avoid the jarring video of Trump supporters battling past police to storm the halls, Trump flags waving. While many minds are made up, the senators will face their own moment to decide whether to convict or acquit Trump of the sole charge of “incitement of insurrection.” The heavy emotional weight of the trial punctuates Trump’s enduring legacy as the first president to face an impeachment trial after leaving office and the first to be twice impeached. The Jan. 6 Capitol siege stunned the world as hundreds of rioters ransacked the building to try to stop the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory, a domestic attack on the nation’s seat of government unlike any in its history. Five people died. “That’s a high crime and misdemeanor,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., declared in opening remarks. “If that’s not an impeachable offense, then there’s no such thing.” Trump’s lawyers insist he is not guilty, his fiery words just figures of speech. In a key early test, senators rejected an effort by Trump’s allies to halt the trial, instead affirming the Senate’s authority under the Constitution to decide the case. They voted 56-44 to confirm their jurisdiction, ruling that impeaching a president after he leaves office is constitutionally permissible. Six Republicans joined the Democrats. Security remained extremely tight at the Capitol on Tuesday, a changed place after the attack, fenced off with razor wire and with armed National Guard troops on patrol. The nine House managers walked across the shuttered building to prosecute the case before the Senate. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden would not be watching the trial of his predecessor. “Joe Biden is the president, he’s not a pundit, he’s not going to opine on back and forth arguments,” she said. With senators gathered as the court of impeachment, sworn to deliver impartial justice, the trial started with the Democratic House managers’ gripping recollections, as they described police officers maimed in the chaos and rioters parading in the very chamber where the trial was being held. Trump’s team countered that the Constitution doesn’t allow impeachment at this late date. Though the trial now proceeds, that’s a legal issue that could resonate with Republicans eager to acquit Trump without being seen as condoning his behavior. Lead lawyer Bruce Castor said he shifted his planned approach after hearing the prosecutors’ opening and instead spoke conversationally to the senators, saying Trump’s team would do nothing but denounce the “repugnant” attack and “in the strongest possible way denounce the rioters.” He appealed to the senators as “patriots first,” and encouraged them to be “cool-headed” as they assess the arguments. Trump attorney David Schoen turned the trial toward starkly partisan tones, saying the Democrats were fueled by a “base hatred” of the former president. Republicans made it clear that they were unhappy with Trump’s defense, many of them saying they didn’t understand where it was going — particularly Castor’s opening. Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who voted with Democrats to move forward with the trial, said that Trump’s team did a “terrible job.” Maine Sen. Susan Collins, who also voted with Democrats, said she was “perplexed.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said it was a “missed opportunity” for the defense. The early defense struggles also underscored the uphill battle that Trump’s lawyers face in defending conduct that preceded an insurrection that senators themselves personally experienced. Though they will almost certainly win Trump’s acquittal — by virtue of the composition of the Senate — they nonetheless face a challenge of defanging the emotion from a trial centered on events that remain raw and visceral, even for Republicans. At one pivotal point, Raskin told his personal story of bringing his family to the Capitol the day of the riot, to witness the certification of the Electoral College vote, only to have his daughter and son-in-law hiding in an office, fearing for their lives. “Senators, this cannot be our future,” Raskin said through tears. “This cannot be the future of America.” The House prosecutors had argued there is no “January exception” for a president to avoid impeachment on his way out the door. Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., referred to the corruption case of William Belknap, a war secretary in the Grant administration, who was impeached, tried and ultimately acquitted by the Senate after leaving office. If Congress stands by, “it would invite future presidents to use their power without any fear of accountability,” he said. On the vote, six Republicans joined with Democrats pursue the trial, just one more than on a similar vote last week. Cassidy joined Collins, Murkowski, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. But the total of 56 was still far from the two-thirds threshold of 67 votes that would be needed for conviction. It appears unlikely that the House prosecutors will call witnesses, in part because the senators were witnesses themselves. At his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, Trump has declined a request to testify. Presidential impeachment trials have been conducted only three times before, leading to acquittals for Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and then Trump last year. Because of the COVID-19 crisis, senators were allowed to spread out, including in the “marble room” just off
GOP largely sides against holding Donald Trump impeachment trial
All but five Senate Republicans voted in favor of an effort to dismiss Donald Trump’s historic second impeachment trial on Tuesday, making clear a conviction of the former president for “incitement of insurrection” after the deadly Capitol siege on Jan. 6 is unlikely. While the Republicans did not succeed in ending the trial before it began, the test vote made clear that Trump still has enormous sway over his party as he becomes the first former president to be tried for impeachment. Many Republicans have criticized Trump’s role in the attack — before which he told his supporters to “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat — but most of them have rushed to defend him in the trial. “I think this was indicative of where a lot of people’s heads are,” said South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, after the vote. Late Tuesday, the presiding officer at the trial, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., was taken to the hospital for observation after not feeling well at his office, spokesman David Carle said in a statement. The 80-year-old senator was examined by the Capitol’s attending physician, who recommended he be taken to the hospital out of an abundance of caution, he said. Later Tuesday, Carle said Leahy had been sent home “after a thorough examination” and was looking forward to getting back to work. Leahy presided over the trial’s first procedural vote, a 55-45 tally that saw the Senate set aside an objection from Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul that would have declared the impeachment proceedings unconstitutional and dismissed the trial. The vote means the trial on Trump’s impeachment will begin as scheduled the week of Feb. 8. The House impeached him Jan. 13, just a week after the deadly insurrection in which five people died. What seemed for some Democrats like an open-and-shut case that played out for the world on live television is running into a Republican Party that feels very different. Not only do senators say they have legal concerns, but they are wary of crossing the former president and his legions of followers. It’s unclear if any Republicans would vote to convict Trump on the actual charge of incitement after voting in favor of Paul’s effort to declare it unconstitutional. Ohio Sen. Rob Portman said after the vote that he had not yet made up his mind, and that constitutionality “is a totally different issue” than the charge itself. But many others indicated that they believe the final vote will be similar. The vote shows that “they’ve got a long ways to go to prove it,” Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst said of House Democrats’ charge. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close Trump ally, said he thinks the vote was “a floor not a ceiling.” Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford said he thinks that most Republicans will not see daylight between the constitutionality and the article of incitement. “You’re asking me to vote in a trial that by itself on its own is not constitutionally allowed?” he asked. Conviction would require the support of all Democrats and 17 Republicans, or two-thirds of the Senate — far from the five Republicans who voted with Democrats Tuesday to allow the trial to proceed. They were Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania — all recent critics of the former president and his effort to overturn President Joe Biden’s win. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who has said Trump “provoked” the riots and indicated he is open to conviction, voted with Paul to move toward dismissing the trial. Democrats rejected the argument that the trial is illegitimate or unconstitutional because Trump is no longer in office, pointing to an 1876 impeachment of a secretary of war who had already resigned and to the opinions of many legal scholars. Democrats also say that a reckoning of the first invasion of the Capitol since the War of 1812, perpetrated by rioters egged on by a president as Electoral College votes were being tallied, is necessary. “It makes no sense whatsoever that a president, or any official, could commit a heinous crime against our country and then defeat Congress’ impeachment powers — and avoid a vote on disqualification — by simply resigning, or by waiting to commit that offense until their last few weeks in office,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Before the vote, the senators officially opened the trial by taking oaths to ensure “impartial justice” as jurors. The nine House Democrats prosecuting the case against Trump carried the sole impeachment charge across the Capitol on Monday evening in a solemn and ceremonial march along the same halls the rioters ransacked three weeks ago. The lead House prosecutor, Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, stood before the Senate to describe the violent events of Jan. 6 and read the House resolution charging “high crimes and misdemeanors.” For Democrats the tone, tenor, and length of the trial so early in Biden’s presidency poses its own challenge, forcing them to strike a balance between their vow to hold Trump accountable and their eagerness to deliver on the new administration’s priorities following their sweep of control of the House, Senate, and White House. Chief Justice John Roberts is not presiding at the trial, as he did during Trump’s first impeachment, potentially affecting the gravitas of the proceedings. The shift is said to be in keeping with protocol because Trump is no longer in office. Instead, Leahy, who serves in the largely ceremonial role of Senate president pro tempore, was sworn in on Tuesday. Leaders in both parties agreed to a short delay in the proceedings, which serves their political and practical interests, even as National Guard troops remain at the Capitol because of security threats to lawmakers ahead of the trial. The start date gives Trump’s still-evolving legal team time to prepare its case, while also providing more than a month’s distance from the passions
Donald Trump impeachment goes to Senate, testing his sway over GOP
House Democrats delivered the impeachment case against Donald Trump to the Senate late Monday for the start of his historic trial, but Republican senators were easing off their criticism of the former president and shunning calls to convict him over the deadly siege at the U.S. Capitol. It’s an early sign of Trump’s enduring sway over the party. The nine House prosecutors carried the sole impeachment charge of “incitement of insurrection” across the Capitol, making a solemn and ceremonial march to the Senate along the same halls the rioters ransacked just weeks ago. But Republican denunciations of Trump have cooled since the Jan. 6 riot. Instead, Republicans are presenting a tangle of legal arguments against the legitimacy of the trial and questioning whether Trump’s repeated demands to overturn Joe Biden’s election really amounted to incitement. What seemed for some Democrats like an open-and-shut case that played out for the world on live television, as Trump encouraged a rally mob to “fight like hell” for his presidency, is running into a Republican Party that feels very differently. Not only are there legal concerns, but senators are wary of crossing the former president and his legions of followers — who are their voters. Security remains tight at the Capitol. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked if Congress starts holding impeachment trials of former officials, what’s next: “Could we go back and try President Obama?” Besides, he suggested, Trump has already been held to account. “One way in our system you get punished is losing an election.” Arguments in the Senate trial will begin the week of Feb. 8, and the case against Trump, the first former president to face impeachment trial, will test a political party still sorting itself out for the post-Trump era. Republican senators are balancing the demands of deep-pocketed donors who are distancing themselves from Trump and voters who demand loyalty to him. One Republican, Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, announced Monday he would not seek reelection in 2022, citing the polarized political atmosphere. For Democrats the tone, tenor, and length of the upcoming trial, so early in Biden’s presidency, poses its own challenge, forcing them to strike a balance between their vow to hold Trump accountable and their eagerness to deliver on the new administration’s priorities following their sweep of control of the House, Senate, and White House. Biden himself told CNN late Monday that the impeachment trial “has to happen.” While acknowledging the effect it could have on his agenda, he said there would be “a worse effect if it didn’t happen.” Biden said he didn’t think enough Republican senators would vote for impeachment to convict, though he also said the outcome might well have been different if Trump had six months left in his term. In a Monday evening scene reminiscent of just a year ago — Trump is now the first president twice impeached — the lead prosecutor from the House, this time Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, stood before the Senate to read the House resolution charging “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Earlier, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said failing to conduct the trial would amount to a “get-out-jail-free card” for others accused of wrongdoing on their way out the door. Republicans appear more eager to argue over trial process than the substance of the case, he said, perhaps to avoid casting judgment on Trump’s “role in fomenting the despicable attack” on the Capitol. Schumer said there’s only one question “senators of both parties will have to answer before God and their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States?” On Monday, it was learned that Chief Justice John Roberts is not expected to preside at the trial, as he did during Trump’s first impeachment, potentially affecting the gravitas of the proceedings. The shift is said to be in keeping with protocol because Trump is no longer in office. Instead, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D- Vt., who serves in the largely ceremonial role of Senate president pro tempore, is set to preside. Leaders in both parties agreed to a short delay in the proceedings that serves their political and practical interests, even as National Guard troops remain at the Capitol amid security threats on lawmakers ahead of the trial. The start date gives Trump’s new legal team time to prepare its case, while also providing more than a month’s distance from the passions of the bloody riot. For the Democratic-led Senate, the intervening weeks provide prime time to confirm some of Biden’s key Cabinet nominees. Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., questioned how his colleagues who were in the Capitol that day could see the insurrection as anything other than a “stunning violation” of the nation’s history of peaceful transfers of power. “It is a critical moment in American history,” Coons said Sunday in an interview. An early vote to dismiss the trial probably would not succeed, given that Democrats now control the Senate. The House approved the charge against Trump on Jan. 13, with 10 Republicans joining the Democrats. Still, the mounting Republican opposition to the proceedings indicates that many GOP senators will eventually vote to acquit Trump. Democrats would need the support of 17 Republicans — a high bar — to convict him. One by one, Republican senators are explaining their objections to the unprecedented trial and scoffing at the idea of trying to convict Trump now that he’s no longer in office. Rand Paul of Kentucky said that without the chief justice presiding the proceedings are a “sham.” Joni Ernst of Iowa said that while Trump “exhibited poor leadership,” it’s those who assaulted the Capitol who “bear the responsibility.” New Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama said Trump is one of the reasons he is in the Senate, so “I’m proud to do everything I can for him.” Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., is among those who say the Senate does not have the constitutional authority to convict a former president. Democrats reject that argument, pointing to an 1876 impeachment of
