What was said in the Trial?

Did you watch the first day of the Impeachment trial of Donald Trump? It was compelling viewing - and was interesting on so many levels. The contrast in style and substance of argument between the two legal teams was stark. 

I was busily taking notes - but I don't (can't, to be honest) do shorthand. As both a semi-retired academic and about to return to radio on my new programme "PPS" on Elite Live Radio - the conduct of the Trial is of direct interest to me and my work. Thankfully, I don't need to rely on my notes or memory - a transcript is available - and it is available to everyone - for free.

The Congressional Record is the equivalent of the British "Hansard" (there are some significant differences, but I'll tackle those in a future post). If you want to review, or just read, what was said - you can download that one or more sections of that day's Congressional Record.

The pdf of the Congressional Record for Day 1 of the Trial of Donald Trump can be found here.

The (Second) Trial of Donald Trump

 We are hours away - as this is published - from the start of the Trump trial in the Senate. There are links to a number of useful resources in my post of Wednesday 3rd February

It was reported in the Washington Post that the proceedings are likely to begin with debate over whether the Constitution permits the trial of a former President. The Congressional Research Servic discuss the various arguments here. This document has also inbuilt links to a number of documents relevant to the trial.

There are a number of ways to follow the trial - directly and indirectly

DIRECT

Senate Floor Proceedings

C-SPAN 2

Live Coverage is also expected on many TV websites (and on your TV) but these will cover proceedings at their editor's discretion.

INDIRECTLY

Reports on the trial will also be posted on News websites -  these may require subscriptions! My main sources will be

Washington Post

Politico

The Hill

Roll Call

The Guardian

CNN

BBC News

Trump's Trial

The Trial Memorandum of the House of Representatives is available here. It sets out the case against the former President.

Trump's defence Memorandum can be accessed here.

There are a number of Congressional Research Papers about the Impeachment of a President - these include -

Impeachment and the Constitution

The Impeachment & Trial of a Former President

The Impeachment Process in the Senate

Obtaining Witnesses in an Impeachment Trial

Click on the relevant name of the paper - and this will give you access to the CRS Papers.

When the trial is in progress, I'm sure that the major news channels such as CNN and BBC News, and of course C-SPAN will give lots of live coverage. Again, just click on the relevant link to take you there. Or if you want the live feed from the Senate itself press here.

As a former lecturer in Constitutional Law, with a deep and specific interest in what happens in the US Congress (scroll through previous posts on Washminster - I can't guarantee that the law and practice remain the same (the blog covered 2007 to 2017 - and much has happened since)) - I'm sure that the next couple of weeks will be filled with reading and watching.

There's a new impetus for me to keep abreast of the news - I start broadcasting on a new internet radio station which launches a fortnight on Friday. It's called Elite Live Radio. My programme is to be called PPS (I'll explain why on air - and later write a post for Washminster) - and is due to air for the first time on Monday February 22nd at Noon, GMT. I hope you'll listen in - the web address is https://www.eliteliveradio.com. We are currently broadcasting a trial service for the next couple of weeks. Do listen in - and let me know what you think.

A City Shining on a Hill?

There has been much to admire about the United States

- a revolution based on the principle of "no taxation without representation"
- a Constitution which enforces a strict separation of powers
- a Constitution, as amended, which includes rights that Citizens can enforce
- the assertion in their 'Declaration of Independence' that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
- fantastic technical innovation - including sending men to the moon; playing a leading role in the development of and use of computers and information technology
- its' "can do" attitudes
- some excellent academic institutions and think tanks.

I have loved visiting the United States, especially Washington DC and NoVa (Northern Virginia). I'm an American Football fan; and an addict of American politics.

John Winthrop, in a speech made as the Pilgrim Fathers approached their new land, is credited with applying this phrase taken from the Bible to the role that 'America' could play in the world. Presidents, including John F Kennedy - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaXt7GE0aUo  and Ronald Reagan have made stirring speeches on this subject.

Yet, I write this post in great sadness. In recent years there has been coming out of certain quarters in the USA a poison which we in the UK and Europe need to protect ourselves from. It was prompted by the news that a gunman had opened fire in an area I deeply love, the Del Ray area of Alexandria, Virginia - injuring (as far as we know as I write this) a number of people, including the Majority Whip of the House of Representatives. It is reported that between 50 and 100 shots were fired from a set-automatic rifle (The Hill : Rep Mo Brooks [quoted in a BBC Report]).

The effort to weaken gun control has been part of the poison - each time I stay in Virginia, I hear of new changes to the law of that State which make it easier for anyone to get hold of some deadly lethal weapons - I've sat in gallery of the House of Representatives as very limited measures to improve safety were opposed and thrown out. THE NRA has been on the offensive - and despite the number and frequency of mass shootings, have gained the support of some Members of Congress, and of State legislatures - not only to reject sensible restrictions, but to push away restrictions that had existed.

We've seen the rise of a rabid populism - and fake news, culminating in the election of a man wholly unfitted to be the President of the United States. Last night I was appalled at the poor performance of the Attorney Officer of the United States - as he displayed a worrying inability to remember certain things as he testified before a Senate Committee.

We've seen a determined push to make it more difficult for certain parts of the American electorate to register to vote - for purely party political objectives.

We've seen the World Economy (as well as the American economy) taken to the brink by some Congressmen who threatened to let the USA default on its debts. We've seen the USA pull out of the Paris Climate Accord - and restart activities which threaten to further degrade the state of our planet.

There is a common theme. The push towards these developments has come from a particular part of the American political spectrum. A movement calling itself "conservative" has been behind a determined effort to push very radical ideas. Fifty-three years ago Barry Goldwater was their standard bearer - and he was given a beating at the Presidential Election. But the movement kept on planning, and spending, and removing Republican moderates. The election of Donald Trump was the, perhaps inevitable, result of their activities. Moderation was hunted down - some very black (political) arts were used to achieve the takeover of the Republican Party - and the country. Some of its fellow travellers were even overtaken by the monster they fed (Eric Cantor, John Boehner). - as Kennedy said in his inauguration speech - "those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside."

The damage to the American system is vividly described in the books of Norman Ornstein and Thomas E Mann ("The Broken Branch" 2006, "It's Even Worse Than It Looks") and many others.

But why does it threaten the UK and Europe? The same crazy ideology is being pushed over here. So called "conservative" ideas have gained a foothold in the British Conservative Party. While the Conservative Party has given public support to the continuation of the National Health Service for over sixty years - there are some now suggesting that the market based approach of US health insurance would be better (!?!?!?). Brexit has its strong supporters - and funders - amongst the American 'conservatives'. We've seen the advocacy of similar barriers to voter registration,

We need to look closely at the tactics they have used to push their ideas to such prominence and power in the USA. We also need to prepare our counter-offensive. Many in the US failed to take them seriously - we must not make the same mistake.

Following Congress

For newer readers of Washminster - a short guide to following events in Congress.

The best resources come from the Houses and Senate themselves.

House of Representatives

The website can be found at http://www.house.gov There is lots of background information. Click on the tabs underneath the main header

- Members of the House [Representatives] - the district (UK - constituency); name; party; Office - do see the 'Key to Room Codes' on that page - and in future posts I will give some of the background to each of the Office Buildings); Telephone number; and the Committees that each member sits on. This page can be listed alphabetically either by State or by Members' last name.

- Leadership - Names (with pictures) of the leadership of each of the two parties. Currently the Republicans (also referred to sometimes as the G.O.P.) are the Majority, and the Democrats are the Minority.

- Committees - these are the powerful workhorses of the House. Woodrow Wilson (when writing as a scholar, before he became President) wrote that "The House sits, not for serious discussion, but to sanction the conclusions of its committees as rapidly as possible. It legislates in its committee rooms...". They are much more powerful than Westminster committees - although the power of the Leadership (the Speaker) has greatly increased in recent decades.

- Legislative Activity - This page has key links to resources enabling the House to be followed from off Capitol Hill - and indeed across the world. You can look ahead with the House calendar (the coming year); the more immediate schedule; keep up to date with the day's business as it happens - Floor proceedings.  The live streaming of committee meetings and hearings can be found at https://www.congress.gov/committees/video When the day is over, you can read the Daily Digest of the Congressional Record for the previous day (and other dates).

- The House Explained - is a good resource for learning about the House and how it works.

The Rules Committee has on its website, a 'parliamentary Bootcamp' - which provides an excellent course on House practice and procedure.

Senate

The Senate website is https://www.senate.gov. The red tabs take you to -

- A list of Senators, with key information about each. It also tells you which 'class' they are - this tells you when they are up for re-election. Class 1 Senators are up for re-election in November 2018.

- Committees

- Legislation and Records - allows you to search by bill number and track floor activity; and using the blue sidebar you can follow other Senate activities - such as confirmations and Treaty ratifications. The Senate calendar and Floor Schedule can be accessed at https://www.senate.gov/legislative/calendars.htm 

Other red tabs take you to information about the Seanate's history; the art it contains; advice on visiting the Senate; and other reference material.

The Senate website is compact - so worth exploring the various links on the site - because there is a host of information to be uncovered.

The Media

To watch Congress - C-SPAN is the place to head to. Again it is a website worth exploring. As well as live streams from the House and Senate - there is a vast, searchable, video library. This not only covers proceedings within Congress - but programmes about history, the courts, and political issues. I hope to produce a post shortly just on C-SPAN.

Congress has three main newspapers devoted to it - and they each have websites. You can subscribe to newsletters and alerts from each of them. They are

Politico
The Hill
RollCall

I'm a big fan of (even if President Trump isn't), and a subscriber to

The Washington Post
New York Times

The Relevance of History

My apologies if you have already read this on one of my other blogs - I have 4 blogs (jdm_progressive, Washminster, jdmeducafe, and JDM's history explorer) - each with its own purpose. This blog is designed for those with an interest in the working of U.K., US & European Politics). The others deal with Progressive Politics, History; and 'learning'. Please feel free to explore all or any - though today, I'm publishing this post in all of them)

I'm writing this whilst taking a cup of tea in the British Museum. It's a wonderful building full of  items of great historical interest from around the world. Though it was built up during the period of the British Empire - when some people had some very stupid ideas about the superiority of certain races - it is an excellent antidote to such idiotic ideas. Think the West is superior to the Islamic world? - visit the wonders in Room 34; worried that the future has been ceded to the Chinese? (Thanks President Trump), then see how great China has been over the centuries. Discover the many heritages that have been  combined to make the United Kingdom.

It is particularly important that we don't forget the lessons of history. At the moment we would do well to recall the consequences of aggressive nationalism - and how quickly some turn to scapegoating others. We need to face up to the worst of our history - as well as be encouraged by the best.

Today is 30th January - a significant day in British history. Back in 1215 (The Magna Carta - Runnymede) - the principle was established that no one - NOT even the King - was above the Law. Charles I forgot that. He hoped for a passive Parliament - and when he didn't get that - he tried to live without calling Parliament - and when that failed - he tried to intimidate parliamentarians (his attempt to arrest five MPs in the chamber have led to a ban on any monarch entering the chamber of the House of Commons) - eventually he went to Nottingham and declared war on his own country.

On this day in 1649, after a trial in Westminster Hall (which he refused to recognise - since he believed himself to be above the law) - he was executed outside the Banqueting Hall in Whitehall.

So remember this day, that important principle, which lies at the heart of British (and American) History and current law.

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.

Trump and China

The Washington Post has produced a useful guide to the background to the row Trump provoked over Taiwan.




Other useful sources on the US-China relationship can be found at -

Washington Post
China Daily
Brookings - John L Thornton China Centre

State of Play

We live in interesting times! - and frankly, worrying times. My nightmare scenario involves

Trump winning the US Presidency (though losing it may bring its own problems - he's already talking about a conspiracy to 'steal the election' from him!)

The Labour Party in Britain opting for purity over power, and re-electing Jeremy Corbyn as leader of a dysfunctional opposition. That might increase the chances of the Scots moving closer to independence as Tory hegemony over Westminster extends beyond the short term.

Sarkozy or Le Pen winning the French Presidency....

Today I will summarise the state of play in the various UK party leadership elections.


LABOUR PARTY

Owen Smith is challenging the incumbent Jeremy Corbyn for leader. Edible voters (Labour Party members; Registered supporters (who signed up and paid during a brief window in July) and Affiliated Supporters (members of affiliated trade unions, socialist societies and other affiliated organisations who individually sign up as affiliated supporters before next Monday) - will be sent ballot papers (Members only) and an email with instructions on voting electronically - from 22nd August. Ballot papers must be returned (or online voting completed) by noon on 21st September. The result be be announced immediately prior to the start of the Labour Conference the following weekend.

Owen Smith's website can be accessed at http://www.owen2016.com

Jeremy Corbyn's website can be accessed at http://www.jeremycorbyn.org.uk 


UKIP

The favourite to succeed Nigel Farage was disqualified because computer problems meant his online application was only successfully received minutes AFTER the deadline closed. (you couldn't make this up! - but serves as a warning to any students submitting essays or eTMAs (OU) close to the cut off time!!!)

The candidates are

Jonathan Arnott - an MEP for North East England. Aged 35

Phillip Broughton - a former UKIP candidate in the parliamentary seat of Hartlepool

Lisa Duffy - A Cambridgeshire councillor , who is a party organiser. She is a former chief of staff for Patrick O'Flynn - a UKIP MEP. If she wins, he will be HER deputy.

Bill Etheridge - 46 year old who is both an MEP and a Dudley councillor.

Diane James - an MEP for South East England - an admirer of Putin.

Elizabeth Jones - a member of UKIPs NEC and the deputy chair of UKIP in Lambeth.

A new approach to politics

I am seeking to start a debate about the future of politics - not just in the UK (where I made this video) but in other democracies.

Please submit any comments - either on this blog - or directly to me at washminster@me.com

US Elections

Yes, we all know about the Presidential election in November - but it's not the only game in town. There will be Congressional elections (34 of the 100 Senate seats and all 435 seats in the House of Representatives), plus various State & local elections and some referenda)

Over the next few months, Washminster will (as it has in previous elections) preview some of the key contests.

But let's kick things off with an overview of the Senate. Whatever the result of the Presidential election, the Senate elections could play a key role in setting, or limiting the direction of American politics in coming years. Even the most ambitious, charismatic President could find his or her (isn't it wonderful be be able to write that phrase at last) plans could be derailed by the Senate. ALL legislation must pass the Senate, and confirmations for Executive and Judicial positions must be made by the 100 member body. The rules of the Senate give a lot of power to individual Senators - who can hold up or even block legislation and confirmations.

At present, 34 of the 100 seats will be up for election. The current make-up of the Senate is Republicans 54, Democrats 44 and 2 independants. (Both of these, Bernie Sanders & Angus King, usually vote with the Democrats). A net gain of 4 seats would give the Democrats control if Clinton wins (the Vice-President has the casting vote in the event of a tie). If Trump wins, the Democrats need a net gain of 5. But a bare majority is not the most important outcome for Presidential-Congressional elections. To end a filibuster (a key tool in the arsenal of a minority) 60 votes are needed. If the President has vetoed legislation passed by both Houses, 67 votes are needed to override that veto.

The Democrats have 10 seats to defend. Currently Cook (the Cook Report, a highly regarded forecaster of US elections) lists 8 of these as Solidly Democratic. 1 (Colorado) is classed as leaning Democratic.

But what makes the election exciting is that 24 Republican seats will be contested. 6 are currently thought to be toss-ups by Cook - enough for the Democrats to take control. North Carolina 'leans Republican - so is in British terms, marginal; and 6 'likely Republican - less marginal, but potentially vulnerable. Eleven are seen as Solid.

Five months out, and there is much that could change. However, these are the elections that could define the presidency of Trump or Clinton. Washminster will help you keep your eye on the critical contests.

Donald Trump

Well Senator Ted Cruz has suspended his campaign. (and as I was writing this The Hill reported that John Kasich was cancelling a DC area event - leading to speculation that he might do the same) It seems that Donald Trump marches on towards inevitable  selection as the candidate for the Republican Party. A number of people have expressed concern about that - from those within the Republican Party; to American citizens; and to those watching from abroad.

What are your views? I'd be interested in receiving reasoned arguments from "Washminster" readers. I'm happy to publish all views (as long as no abuse is involved).

If you think Mr Trump would be worth supporting, if he is indeed he is the Republican candidate - then set down down your reasons. Why would he be the best person for the job? and you if can't go that far, how would you address the concerns that some people have expressed.

If you would be opposed to his becoming President Trump, then again - set out your reasons and concerns. Is your opposition based on favouring a different ideology (are you a natural Democrat supporter), or are your reasons deeper.

Do either respond on the comment link on this website - or send me an email (jdavidmorgan@googlemail.com)

The Dumbing Down of Politics

Thomas E Mann is an academic specialising in the US Congress, whose work I have great respect for. Of particular note (but there is so much more that he has done) is the joint writing he has done with Norm Ornstein - The Permanent Campaign and its Future (2000); The Broken Branch (2006); It's Even Worse than it Looks (2012).

In a recent Brookings Post he wrote - and it is worth reading!

Donald Trump and the Amen chorus of Republican presidential aspirants may have appeared to monopolize the capacity to make fantastical claims about what’s wrong with America and how to fix it. But a rival has appeared on the scene, outlining a very different fantasy plan to run for president on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig looks meek—a dead ringer for Mr. Peepers—yet is anything but. Lessig built an impressive career in legal scholarship on the regulation of cyberspace, and the mild-mannered, soft-spoken academic became a cult hero among libertarians fearful of increasing legal restrictions on copyright, trademark and the electromagnetic spectrum. But Lessig’s transformation into a political activist was spurred by his personal revelation that money in politics is the root of all our governing problems. Eliminate the dependence of elected officials on private donors and the formidable obstacles to constructive policymaking will crumble. Simple but searing truth, or a caricature of a complex governing system shaped by institutions, ideas/ideologies, and interests?

Lessig became a whirlwind of energy and organization to promote his new values and beliefs, leading efforts to “Change Congress,” convene a second constitutional convention, raise awareness of corruption in politics through the “New Hampshire Rebellion,” and start the “Mayday PAC,” a super PAC designed to end all super PACs. He wrote the bestselling book Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress—and A Plan to Stop It, delivered a series of popular TED talks, and tirelessly traveled the country with his PowerPoint.

With none of these enterprises yet bearing fruit, Lessig has decided to raise the stakes. He has announced that if he receives $1 million from small donors by September, he will seek the Democratic presidential nomination, running as a “referendum candidate.” His single-issue platform, built around the concept of “Citizen Equality,” consists of “true” campaign finance reform supplemented by electoral reform (to weaken the influence of gerrymandering) and voting rights. His goal is to use the election to build a mandate for political reform that will cure our democratic ills. Lessig will apparently have nothing to say about anything other than political reform, insisting that his issue should be and can be the number one priority of voters in the 2016 elections. If nominated and elected, President Lessig will serve in office only long enough to enact the Citizen Equality Act and then resign, turning over the powers and responsibilities of the office to the vice president. Recently he generously informed the Vice President that he would happily enable a third Joe Biden term by selecting him as his running mate.

The hubris of the Harvard Professor is breathtaking. In virtually every respect, his strategy is absurd. Lessig’s political reform agenda is stymied by Republicans, not Democrats. Why not direct his energies where the opposition resides? All of the current Democratic presidential candidates support the thrust of these reforms. But saying that this is their highest priority is likely to harm, not boost, their candidacies. Why would even the most ardent supporter of the three pillars of Lessig’s reform agenda cast a ballot solely on this basis? Big and important issues divide the two parties today and the stakes of public action or inaction are huge. We don’t have the luxury of using the election to try to build a mandate for a set of political reforms that would have no chance of passing in the face of GOP opposition and would be of only incremental utility if they did.

Campaign finance does play a corrosive role in our democracy and I have invested much of my career grappling with it. There is no doubt that money in elections facilitates the transfer of economic inequality into political inequality, and the spectacle of several hundred plutocrats dominating the finance of our elections should be a target of serious reform efforts in the courts and the Congress. At the same time it is foolish to imagine that campaign finance is the only route for private wealth to influence public policy or that its reform will dramatically transform the policy process. Money did not prevent the major legislative enactments of 2009-2010—including the stimulus, student loans, the Affordable Care Act, and financial services reform. Nor is it likely to be the critical factor on climate change, immigration, infrastructure or jobs and wages; which party wins the White House and whether control with Congress is unified or divided is key. If anything, the Lessig campaign is likely to weaken the forces for political reform by demonstrating just how small the relative priority for this action is.

Trump offers the country his outsider status, success in building his personal wealth, an outsized personality, a brashness in asserting how easily he can solve the country’s problems, and a hearty appetite for and skill in stoking the anger and fears of a segment of the country. He feeds the notion that a strong, fearless, wily leader, inexperienced and mostly uninformed in politics and governing, can be the man on a white horse saving a great country losing its exceptional status. His claim that all politicians are bought by private interests—a claim Lessig eagerly embraces—fits well with his grandiose claims that he alone can fix what ails the country. A significant segment of Republican voters, presumably not well versed in the American constitutional system are attracted to him, at least enough for him to be a factor in this election campaign.

Lessig is a far less commanding presence but his ambition burns no less than that of Trump. The notoriety, celebrity, and adoring audiences are heady stuff, even if on a much smaller scale. Lessig told Bloomberg that Trump’s candidacy is evidence that his reform message is taking hold. Lessig said, Trump “strikes people as credible when he says all these people (politicians) are bought—I used to buy them …Trump is saying the truth.” Lessig will be a minor figure in this election and the causes for which he fights are unlikely to advance from it. Both Lessig and Trump, despite their differences in visibility and importance in the election, will have contributed to the dumbing down of American politics, a reality that will bring tears to the eyes of civics teachers and political science professors across the country.

It is well worth signing up for Brookings newsletters - which can be done here.