Name: Opinion | Trump is right. We might have to impeach him again.
Brand: washingtonpost.com
SKU: washingtonpost-com-68
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Opinion | Trump is right. We might have to impeach him again.

preview

This article was published more than&nbsp;3 years agoCommentGift ShareGeorge T. Conway III is a lawyer and is also an adviser to the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump super PAC.“So we’ll probably have to do it again.” the already-once-impeached President Trump on Thursday in the East Room, musing about the possibility he could become the first president to be impeached more than once. And on the very next day, as though he were competing for it, Trump showed precisely why he could be destined to achieve that ignominious fate.With essentially no pretense about why he was doing it, the president brazenly retaliated Friday against two witnesses who gave truthful testimony in the House’s impeachment inquiry. He fired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland. And he also fired a third man, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, merely for being the brother of the first. Trump essentially admitted his retaliatory motive on Saturday, when he that he sacked Vindman in part for having “reported contents of my ‘perfect’ calls incorrectly.”AdvertisementIf this were a criminal investigation, and Alexander Vindman and Sondland had given their testimony to a grand jury, this Friday Night Massacre could have been a . At the very least, it ought to be impeachable: If Richard M. Nixon was to be for authorizing for witnesses, and Trump himself was for directing defiance of House subpoenas, then there should be no doubt that punishing witnesses for complying with subpoenas and giving truthful testimony about presidential misconduct should make for a high crime or misdemeanor as well.But it’s really not about this one day, or this one egregious act. It’s about who Trump is, who he always was and who he always will be. It’s about the complete mismatch between the man and the office he holds.It’s about the fact that the presidency is a fiduciary position, the ultimate public trust. And that Trump’s narcissism to put anyone else’s interests above his own, including the nation’s. Indeed, he can’t even distinguish between his interests and the nation’s — and doesn’t need to, according to and now the judgment of the Senate. For Trump, it’s always L’état, c’est Trump, as many have .AdvertisementOr, as Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) during the impeachment trial, “you know you can’t trust this president to do what is right for this country. You can trust he will do what is right for Donald Trump. He will do it now. He has done it before.”And he will do it again. He did do it again by firing the Vindmans and Sondland. He’s telling us he will do it again. And no one can seriously doubt it, even those who voted to acquit. The ever-hopeful Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who said that she was voting to acquit partly because she thought Trump had learned “a pretty big lesson” from being impeached, quickly to say she was merely being “aspirational.” Such a lofty aspiration — that the president refrain from committing an impeachable offense.“Fantastical” would better describe it, actually. On Thursday, Trump as the innocent victim: “Went through hell, unfairly. Did nothing wrong. Did nothing wrong.” “We were treated unbelievably unfairly.” “It was all bullshit.” It was “a very good phone call.” "I call it a ‘perfect call’ because it was.”AdvertisementOn the flip side, it was Trump’s opponents who did wrong. He called his impeachment “evil,” “corrupt,” “phony, rotten,” brought about by “dirty cops,” “leakers and liars" and, in general, “very evil and sick people” who were “vicious as hell.” “They made up facts.” “It was a disgrace.”So just as we had Nixon’s enemies list, so we have had of Trump’s use of presidential power for vindictive ends. Long before the Vindmans and Sondland, the firing of James B. Comey as FBI director. Trump’s alleged to “screw Amazon,” whose chief executive owns this newspaper, which, frankly, ought by itself to have been an impeachable offense. So, too, his against Google, Facebook and Twitter. His obvious for its politicians’ criticisms of him. His attacks who dared assess him critically. The Ukraine scandal itself, indeed, was partially an effort to attain vengeance for wrongs — Ukrainian “interference” — Trump imagines were done to him in 2016. He’ll use whatever means he has at his presidential disposal to redress his bottomless pit of grievances.And he’ll only get worse. Narcissistic leaders such as Trump always do. As we’ve now seen, his rage leads to retribution and misconduct, which beget more criticism, and more investigation, and even more rage, retribution and misconduct. Over and over again.AdvertisementSo America beware: The state is Trump, and he’s very, very angry. We might, indeed, have to do it again.Read more:Looking for more following the president’s acquittal?See Dana Milbank’s Impeachment Diary: Find all the entries in .Get the latest: See complete Opinions coverage Read the most recent take from the Editorial Board: The House impeachment managers weigh in in an op-ed: Stay informed: Read the from the Post newsroom.Want even more? , delivered to your inbox six days a week. CommentsGift ArticleTOP STORIESThe BriefingDon’t miss reporting and analysis from the Hill and the White House.Try a different topic or to save your preferences

This article was published more than&nbsp;3 years agoCommentGift ShareGeorge T. Conway III is a lawyer and is also an adviser to the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump super PAC.“So we’ll probably have to do it again.” the already-once-impeached President Trump on Thursday in the East Room, musing about the possibility he could become the first president to be impeached more than once. And on the very next day, as though he were competing for it, Trump showed precisely why he could be destined to achieve that ignominious fate.With essentially no pretense about why he was doing it, the president...

Opinion | Trump is right. We might have to impeach him again.

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS