The Wall Street Journal broke the story last Friday. Congratulations to WSJ. From there, the whistle blower story has spawned a flood of outstanding journalism. Here’s a sampling…
Wehner
Peter Wehner, The Atlantic, on President Trump’s “disordered personality”
Donald Trump’s disordered personality — his unhealthy patterns of thinking, functioning, and behaving — has become the defining characteristic of his presidency. It manifests itself in multiple ways: his extreme narcissism; his addiction to lying about things large and small, including his finances and bullying and silencing those who could expose them; his detachment from reality, including denying things he said even when there is video evidence to the contrary; his affinity for conspiracy theories; his demand for total loyalty from others while showing none to others; and his self-aggrandizement and petty cheating.
It manifests itself in Trump’s impulsiveness and vindictiveness; his craving for adulation; his misogyny, predatory sexual behavior, and sexualization of his daughters; his open admiration for brutal dictators; his remorselessness; and his lack of empathy and sympathy, including attacking a family whose son died while fighting for his country, mocking a reporter with a disability and ridiculing a former POW. (When asked about Trump’s feelings for his fellow human beings, Trump’s mentor, the notorious lawyer Roy Cohn, reportedly said, “He pisses ice water.”)
Nakashima
Greg Miller, Josh Dawey, Paul Sonne and Ellen Nakashima, The Washington Post, on Rudy Giuliani’s pivotal role
The former New York mayor appears to have seen (Volodymyr) Zelensky, a political neophyte elected president of Ukraine in April and sworn in in May, as a potential ally on two political fronts: punishing those Giuliani suspected of playing a role in exposing the Ukraine-related corruption of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, and delivering political ammunition against Biden.
After the conclusion of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russia’s role in the 2016 presidential election, Giuliani turned his attention to Ukraine, officials said, and soon began pushing for personnel changes at the embassy while seeking meetings with Zelensky subordinates. He also had his own emissaries in Ukraine who were meeting with officials, setting up meetings for him and sending back information that he could circulate in the United States.
Baker
Peter Baker, The New York Times, on the inevitability of impeachment
(T)he only real surprise was how long it took to get here. Mr. Trump’s critics began discussing impeachment within days of his election because of various ethical issues and Russia’s interference in the 2016 campaign. By last year’s midterm election, Mr. Trump repeatedly raised impeachment on the campaign trail, warning that Democrats would come after him if they won the House.
…The beginning of the long-anticipated showdown arrived when Mr. Trump was in New York for the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly, creating a surreal split-screen spectacle as the president sought to play global statesman while fending off his enemies back in Washington. One moment, he talked of war and peace and trade with premiers and potentates. The next, he engaged in a rear-guard struggle to save his presidency.
Mr. Trump gave a desultory speech and shuffled between meetings with leaders from Britain, India and Iraq while privately consulting with aides about his next move against the House. Shortly before heading into a lunch with the United Nations secretary general, he decided to release a transcript of his July telephone call with the president of Ukraine that is central to the allegations against him. In effect, he was pushing his chips into the middle of the table, gambling that the document would prove ambiguous enough to undercut the Democratic case against him.
Leonhardt
Dave Leonhardt, The New York Times, on why he changed his mind and concluded the House of Representatives should initiate impeachment proceedings
Starting an impeachment inquiry is the proper move because of both what’s changed and what hasn’t. What has changed? In his dealings with Ukraine, the president committed a new and clearly understandable constitutional high crime: He put his own interests above the national interest by pressuring a foreign country to damage a political rival. He evidently misused taxpayer money in the process. He has shown he’s willing to do almost anything to win re-election.
What hasn’t changed? Trump is unfit for office. He has repeatedly violated his oath of office, to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. He has weakened America’s national security. He has used the presidency for personal enrichment. He has broken the law more than once. He has tried to undermine American democracy.
Trump has handed Democrats a new opportunity to persuade the country that his presidency needs to end, on Jan. 20, 2021, if not sooner.
**
Reporters covering the White House are working their asses off — and writing stories they will show to their grandchildren some day.
First, it was the Electoral College, trying to get them to not certify the election. That failed. Then there was the 25th Amendment strategy. That failed, too. Then there was the Mueller “investigation”. That ended up with a whole lot of nothing. And it just goes on and on, now it’s impeachment. It reminds me of the elections for student government at Emory. If a certain clique of students didn’t retain control, they’d yell and scream until the election was re-run. And if they didn’t win then, there would be lawyers and lawsuits filed, and the election would get re-run again, until they got back in power. That’s what this is. And a lot of people are getting really sick and tired of it.
It really doesn’t take any hard work or courage to attack Trump. His faults are obvious. Yet he plays the press as if they are mere lemmings, which they surely are.
Trump is the metric, the symptom of whether all this is acceptable in an aging democracy where wealth has achieved its goal of unchallenged dominance over a free society’s needs and security. The grotesque image of what has unfolded in the past three years is a remarkably accurate reflection of just who we are. A majority in this country still imagines who we can be. Can they agree on a candidate, and will they vote?
We will definitely have a candidate, and I hope a lot more people who enjoy the benefits of a free society will vote. If they don’t, we will probably move closer to losing that hallmark.