{"id":232228,"date":"2019-09-24T20:56:55","date_gmt":"2019-09-25T00:56:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=232228"},"modified":"2019-09-24T20:56:55","modified_gmt":"2019-09-25T00:56:55","slug":"trump-ukraine-reports-spurred-freshmen-to-back-impeachment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2019\/09\/24\/trump-ukraine-reports-spurred-freshmen-to-back-impeachment\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump, Ukraine reports spurred freshmen to back impeachment"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
FILE: President of the United States Donald Trump speaking at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland. (Photo<\/a>: Gage Skidmore\/Flickr<\/a>, CC BY-SA 2.0<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

WASHINGTON \u2014 The rookie Democratic lawmaker caught House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s eye as the two women brushed past each other in a marbled Capitol hallway. Neither slowed her step. But over her shoulder, Pelosi flashed Rep. Elissa Slotkin a thumbs-up and said, \u201cCongratulations.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThank you!\u201d Slotkin responded.<\/p>\n

The lightning-quick moment just before noon Tuesday was one of the first public signs that Pelosi and the Democratic freshmen from swing districts who had resisted calls for President Donald Trump’s impeachment had broken the dam, sweeping the party toward formal proceedings against the nation’s 45th president.<\/p>\n

Slotkin of Michigan and six other freshman Democrats with national security backgrounds had called for Trump’s impeachment from the pages of The Washington Post only the night before, most for the first time, over reports that he had pressured Ukraine to investigate Democrat Joe Biden’s son.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt was a red line,\u201d said Rep. Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey, another of the column’s co-authors.<\/p>\n

Pelosi, monitoring the frenzy of texts, emails and sentiment in her caucus all weekend, read the op-ed Monday night on the flight back to Washington.<\/p>\n

What followed was a flash flood of new demands from Pelosi’s leadership team on down to vulnerable newcomers for a formal investigation against the president. And that freed Pelosi to abandon her resistance to impeachment. A few hours after her brush with Slotkin, she announced the House would move.<\/p>\n

\u201cNobody is above the law,\u201d Pelosi said as she launched a formal impeachment inquiry against Trump.<\/p>\n

Earlier Tuesday, at The Atlantic Festival in Washington, she said, \u201cNow we have the facts.\u201d She added, \u201cWe have gotten to this different place, use any metaphor,\u201d offering \u201ccrossing the Rubicon\u201d and a \u201cnew day is dawning\u201d as examples.<\/p>\n

The moment had its roots in former special counsel Robert Mueller’s report that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election and Trump had tried to shut down the investigation. More than half the Democratic caucus called for impeachment proceedings just on that basis. But not national security freshmen like Slotkin who had handed Democrats control of the House. And not some of the more senior members such as Rep. John Lewis, the civil rights icon and conscience of the House.<\/p>\n

Only a few minutes after Pelosi congratulated Slotkin and opened the House for business Tuesday, Lewis set the tone with an impassioned speech from the House floor.<\/p>\n

\u201cNow is the time to act,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Many Democrats, including Pelosi, had thought the public didn’t understand or care enough about Mueller’s findings to get behind divisive impeachment proceedings. Not even Trump’s stonewalling was enough.<\/p>\n

But that all changed late last week when Trump was reported to have asked Ukraine’s leader on a call to investigate work done for the country by Biden’s son.<\/p>\n

As Trump continued to not entirely deny the charge over the weekend, freshman Rep. Abigail Spanberger sensed sentiment in her politically mixed Virginia district \u201cpivot\u201d from a \u201cgeneral pit of confusion\u201d over the Mueller report \u2014 to clarity.<\/p>\n

\u201cI saw a shift on the ground in my district,\u201d said Spanberger, another author of the op-ed. \u201cOn the ground there was a change in the conversation. This is something new. It’s a new phase. This is a new type of allegation.\u201d<\/p>\n

This time, it was Trump being alleged to have leaned on another country to coerce help in defeating a political rival. Trump said Tuesday that he would authorize the release of the \u201cunredacted\u201d transcript of his phone call with Ukraine’s president, predicting it would show no evidence of wrongdoing. Still, he raged on Twitter about a fresh \u201cwitch hunt.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Democrats newly in favour of impeachment were not convinced. Leaving a caucus meeting after Pelosi’s announcement, several said they had begun writing the op-ed almost as soon as the first reports of the Ukraine call were reported.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt’s crystal clear,\u201d said freshman Rep. Elaine Luria of Virginia, another of the column’s authors. \u201cIf this isn’t impeachable, what is?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a one discrete, very understandable offence that the president could have possibly done while sitting in office … using national security money,\u201d said Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa. \u201cI think it’s time to move to that next step.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sherrill delivered one of the harshest statements of all from the Democratic newcomers.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe president of the United States is attempting to ‘fix’ the election,\u201d she said in a statement, adding that Trump \u201cis threatening our national security.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

WASHINGTON \u2014 The rookie Democratic lawmaker caught House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s eye as the two women brushed past each other …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":231771,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-232228","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news","category-news-w","mauthors-laurie-kellman","mauthors-the-associated-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/232228","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=232228"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/232228\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":232229,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/232228\/revisions\/232229"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/231771"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=232228"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=232228"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=232228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}