Trump, the Self-Impeaching President

Federal law expressly states that it is illegal for “a person to solicit, accept, or receive” anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a United States election.

Yet there stood President Trump outside the White House on Thursday, openly soliciting help from a foreign government for his re-election prospects by declaring to the assembled press that “China should start an investigation into the Bidens.” This, of course, after Mr. Trump has already become subject to an impeachment inquiry after implicating himself in a scheme to seek foreign help for his campaign in a conversation with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

This might seem self-defeating — “self-impeaching,” even. A United States president urging a foreign government to investigate his political rival would seem to be flagrantly violating the law, along with American notions of fair play and decency.

But this president is a master at what Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan called defining deviancy down. One baldfaced presidential lie, once exposed, is an outrage; a thousand such lies is a statistic.

Mr. Trump and his defenders are increasingly taking the position that what he did in pressuring the Ukrainian president was no big deal — the responsible course of action, even. Ergo, the more governments that Mr. Trump urges to do the same thing, the more normal, if not public-spirited, such aberrant presidential behavior will seem. The cynical marketing calculation — Mr. Trump’s favorite form of math — would seem to be that, as with previous administration outrages, the news media will grow weary, the public will grow numb, the Democratic inquisitors will appear ineffectual. Mr. Trump is also, of course, seeking to drag former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, down to his level and implicate them in the same kind of self-dealing that he and his own family stand accused of.

This might work. But it also might not. There is no historical precedent for a president demanding that a foreign government investigate another American politician. If Mr. Trump has evidence of possible corruption overseas, his counsel should relay it to the Department of Justice and let the F.B.I. do its job, in coordination with its foreign counterparts.

Instead, Mr. Trump used his telephone conversation with Mr. Zelensky to pressure him to do Mr. Trump a “favor” and consult with Rudy Giuliani, serving as Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer and unofficial envoy, and the attorney general, William Barr, about digging up dirt on the Bidens. At that time, the United States, under direct orders from the president, was withholding nearly $400 million in military aid appropriated by Congress to help Ukraine defend itself against Russian encroachment on its eastern border.

Much remains unknown about how the various dots do or do not connect. But basic facts of the Ukraine approach are not in dispute. Nor can there be much question about what Mr. Trump so publicly asked China to do.

There is a certain twisted logic to the president’s approach.

Multiple Republican lawmakers have stepped forward to declare the July 25 phone call, as Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina put it, “a nothing (non-quid pro quo) burger.”

“I have zero problems with this phone call,” Mr. Graham said in a Sunday appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Among those hitting the same talking point have been Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin: “We all kind of looked at it and said, ‘There’s nothing here.’” And Senator James Risch of Idaho: “I saw nothing in the conversation that was inappropriate. We’re done here.”

This represents a stark reversal of Republicans’ position during the special counsel’s investigation of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. In that case, Republican lawmakers said that it would be troubling if there was clear evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Now, their new position seems to be: There can’t be anything untoward going on here because the president is being so blatant about soliciting foreign help.

Indeed, Mr. Trump seems to be operating on the assumption that the more shameless his assault on democratic norms and laws, the more he can get away with. This is not how the system works, no matter how fervently Mr. Trump’s Republican defenders may wish it so.

If Trump Goes Down, He’s Taking Everyone With Him

The impeachment inquiry is laying him bare. It’s not a pretty sight.

I was based in Washington and reported from Capitol Hill during Bill Clinton’s impeachment, which was the last time the country entered waters like these. It was ugly, and Democrats and Republicans traded vicious words.

But Clinton never publicly accused his detractors of treason or floated the idea that one of them be arrested on those grounds, as Donald Trump just did with Adam Schiff.

Clinton and his defenders raised the specter of a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” to use Hillary Clinton’s infamous phrase, thus asserting that he was being persecuted for his politics, not punished for his misdeeds.

But they didn’t insist, as Trump and his defenders routinely do, that a vital part of the federal government was an evil cabal intent on undermining our democratic processes, which is Trump’s self-serving characterization of the intelligence community. Their central strategy wasn’t to ignite a full-blown crisis of confidence in the institutions of government. They weren’t serving dire notice, as Trump essentially is, that if the president goes down, he’s taking everyone and everything else with him.

The Clintons possessed and projected a moral arrogance that was laughably oxymoronic under the circumstances. And they and other prominent Democrats junked the party’s supposed concern for women’s empowerment to savage Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones and others who came forward with claims about the president’s extramarital sexual activity, including serious accusations of sexual violence.

But they didn’t equate the potential fall of the president with the fall of the Republic. They didn’t go full apocalypse. Bill Clinton didn’t prophesy that his impeachment would lead to a kind of “civil war” from which the country would “never heal,” as Trump did by tweeting an evangelical pastor’s comments on Fox News along those lines.

wrote last week that the prospect of Trump’s impeachment terrified me, and one of the main reasons I cited was what we’re seeing now: his histrionic response, which is untethered from any sense of honor, civic concern or real patriotism.

[Get a more personal take on politics, newsmakers and more with Frank Bruni’s exclusive commentary every week. Sign up for his newsletter.]

He’s not like most of his predecessors in the White House, who had some limits, at least a few scruples and the capacity to feel shame. Their self-pity wasn’t this unfathomably deep, their delusions of martyrdom this insanely grand. “There has been no President in the history of our Country who has been treated so badly as I have,” he tweeted last week, and the violins have wailed only louder and weepier since.

While there were fellow narcissists among his forebears, was there a single nihilist like Trump? I doubt it, and so the current waters are in fact uncharted, because the ship of state has a sort of madman at its helm.

That he’s fighting back by impugning his critics’ motives, stonewalling investigators and carping about the media shouldn’t disturb anyone, not if we’re being grown-ups. Richard Nixon, confronted with his impeachment, thrashed and seethed. Clinton assembled a war room in an effort to outwit his adversaries. That’s the nature of politics. That’s the right of the accused.

But in the mere week since a formal impeachment inquiry was announced, Trump has already gone much farther than that and behaved in ways that explode precedent, offend decency and boggle the mind. We’re fools if we don’t brace for more and worse.

For grotesque example, he has suggested — repeatedly — that government officials who tattled about his crooked conversation with the Ukrainian president are spies who deserve to be executed. Had any other president done that, many Americans would speak of nothing else for the next month.

But from Trump, such a horror wasn’t even surprising, and it competed for attention with so many other outrages that it was dulled, the way so much of his unconscionable behavior is. When you churn out a disgrace a minute and no one expects anything nobler, you’re inoculated by your own awfulness.

He has taken his vilification of the media to new depths, content on this front, as on others, to pump Americans full of a toxic cynicism so long as he profits from it. He and his handmaidens have disseminated distortion after distortion, lie upon lie, including the claim that deep-state officials tweaked the criteria for whistle-blowers just so that someone could ensnare him.

They have instructed Americans not to believe their own eyes, their own ears, their own intelligence. They mean to put truth itself up for grabs, no matter the fallout.

Lindsey Graham, the sycophant of the centurycalled the whistle-blower’s complaint a setup, as if it didn’t rest on the sturdy foundation of a reconstructed transcript — released by the White House — that shows Trump imploring a foreign leader to do political dirty work for him.

Trump keeps saying it was a “perfect” call, which is like seeing Dom Pérignon in a puddle of sewage. Then again, his presidency has long depended on such optical illusions.

There’s light, though, and it’s this: As corrosive as his tirades are, they may also be what does him in. He’s poised to take this persecution complex too far.

Already, there has been a swell of support for impeachment, according to new polls released by CNN and Monmouth University, and I bet that trend continues as revelations of his wrongdoing cascade and as he wildly overreacts.

That probably wouldn’t be enough to get Republican senators to convict him and remove him from office, should the House follow through with impeachment and a Senate trial ensue. But it would affect November 2020.

He’s in a bind, because his burn-down-the-house defense against impeachment makes the best case that he must be impeached — that a leader with no bounds and no bottom can’t be allowed to rage on unimpeded. The impeachment inquiry is laying Trump bare. As scary as that is for us, it may be even scarier for him.

Graham: ‘I don’t care’ what happened between Trump and McGahn

Sen. Lindsey Graham on Sunday said he doesn’t care if President Donald Trump told then-White House counsel Don McGahn to fire special counsel Robert Mueller — the Mueller investigation is over.

“It’s all theater — it doesn’t matter,” the South Carolina Republican told “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan. “I don’t care what he said to Don McGahn — it’s what he did. The president never obstructed.”

“It doesn’t matter to you that the president is changing a version of events and some would say lying?” Brennan asked.

In a redacted version of Mueller’s report, McGahn is reported to have said he refused to fire Mueller when ordered to do so by Trump. The president has denied he told anyone to fire McGahn, tweeting that if he had wanted to fire Mueller, he could have done it himself.

“If you’re going to look at every president who pops off at his staff, asks them to do something that is maybe crazy, then we won’t have any presidents,” Graham said, claiming he had “fought hard as hell” to make sure Mueller was able to carry out his investigation unobstructed.

Graham, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he won’t call Mueller or McGahn to testify now.

“I don’t know how clear I can be, Margaret: It’s over for me,” Graham said, calling obstruction of justice “absurd.”