Dear Representative Herrera Beutler:
On Friday, December 13, you released a press statement declaring that you “will vote against both articles of impeachment if they reach the floor.” I am writing to tell you that your decision is deeply, fundamentally wrong.You wrote that the “obstruction of Congress article is the least credible of the two.” The way you arrive at this conclusion is disingenuous at best. You declare that there was no obstruction because “no one at the White House has defied a court order.” That is nonsense. Donald Trump and his administration have guaranteed that Congress cannot exercise its duty to oversee the executive; they have blocked every legitimate effort to obtain the facts in this case. At the direction of the President, executive branch officials who are in a position to testify to facts repeatedly defied Congressional subpoenas, and invented startling new notions of executive privilege to justify their refusal to comply with those subpoenas.
The idea that the process of impeachment is “rushed” is absurd. There have been lengthy and thorough investigations, testimony from officials brave enough to defy the power of the administration, and hearings that made it plain to all but the most biased of observers that Donald Trump sought to undermine Congress’ legitimate functions. To put this in some perspective: the impeachment of Andrew Johnson took place a mere three days after he fired Edwin Stanton as Secretary of War; on this timeline, Trump could have been impeached on August 28.
The shoddy logic that you assert in refusing to accept the first article is magnified in your rejection of the second article. You claim that “efforts to prove the president’s motives have been defeated by the lack of firsthand testimony caused by Democratic leadership’s rushed timeline.” This is bullshit, and you know it. The lack of firsthand testimony is the direct consequence of obstruction alleged in the first article, not of any putative rush by the Democratic leadership. Indeed, we heard from a series of extraordinarily well-informed witnesses, some of whom were indeed first-hand witnesses to the corrupt acts alleged in the second article.
Your discussion of the evidence that was brought before Congress is dishonest. You insinuate that the delay in providing aid was acceptable because the aid was “provided before the statutory deadline.” That insinuation is an attempt to hoodwink your constituents into thinking that this was just the way aid happens. But any fair-minded and informed observer would have noticed that the aid was only released once the White House knew that a whistleblower had reported his or her consternation over the “perfect” call with President Zelensky. Any fair-minded informed reader of the notes of the transcript would also conclude that President Trump was asking for a political favor and using the power of the United States to advance his own personal and political interests. (To save you the trouble of rebutting this with nonsense about the whistleblower’s identity: everything of substance the whistleblower alleged has been corroborated: by the notes of the transcript, by impartial witnesses who listened to the call, and by foreign service officials.)
Following the GOP talking points, you tell us that the president of Ukraine “says he was not pressured.” What, pray tell, do you expect him to say? Ukraine remains in danger: Russian troops, again as our career foreign service and military people testified, remain a knife at the throat of his country, and his country needs our help, our money, our Javelins, to be able to stand up to Russian aggression. Perhaps you should go back and watch the testimony of our career foreign service personnel, who painted a clear picture of the perilous position in which Donald Trump and the Three Amigos placed Zelensky and Ukraine.
To reduce the effort to hold Donald Trump accountable for his wholesale assault on the principle of Constitutional government is not, as you breezily dismiss it, “a mere political disagreement”—and you know it. Or should. President Trump is being impeached for his conduct; the impeachment about accountability, integrity, and the survival of our Constitution and our government. By mendaciously misreading the articles of impeachment, you have abdicated your responsibilities. You, and the bulk of the Congressional GOP, will be remembered as those who sold the soul of the nation.
Sincerely,
André Lambelet
Leave a Reply