WASHINGTON — House Democratic leaders on Tuesday formally called for President Trump’s removal from office, asserting that he “ignored and injured the interests of the nation” in two articles of impeachment that charged him with abusing his power and obstructing Congress.
In nine short pages, the draft articles accused Mr. Trump of carrying out a scheme “corruptly soliciting” election assistance from the government of Ukraine in the form of investigations that would smear his Democratic political rivals. To do so, Democrats charged, Mr. Trump used as leverage two “official acts”: the delivery of $391 million in security assistance and a White House meeting for Ukraine’s president.
“In all of this, President Trump abused the powers of the presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit,” according to a draft of the first article. “He has also betrayed the nation by abusing his office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections.”
A second article charges that by ordering across-the-board defiance of House subpoenas for testimony and documents related to the Ukraine matter, the president engaged in “unprecedented, categorical and indiscriminate defiance” that harmed the House’s constitutional rights.
“In the history of the republic, no president has ever ordered the complete defiance of an impeachment inquiry or sought to obstruct and impede so comprehensively the ability of the House to investigate ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’” the obstruction article says.
In announcing a pair of charges that was narrowly focused on the Ukraine matter, Democrats made a careful political calculation intended to project unity and protect moderate lawmakers who face steep re-election challenges in conservative-leaning districts.
They left out an article that had been the subject of internal debate among Democrats in recent weeks. It would have charged Mr. Trump with obstruction of justice based on his attempts to thwart Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into his campaign’s ties to Russian election interference in 2016.
Such an article had been championed by progressives — including Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the Judiciary Committee — but resisted by moderates who had long signaled they would not support impeaching Mr. Trump based on Mr. Mueller’s report.
Democrats also backed away from charging the president with bribery, one of only a few offenses listed in the Constitution as grounds for impeachment, and a term Democrats had increasingly been using to describe Mr. Trump’s conduct.
Democrats unveiled drafts of the two articles ahead of a meeting of the House Judiciary Committee, where the panel will debate and vote on the charges. It could vote by Thursday to recommend them to the full House for final approval.
transcript
Democrats Announce Two Articles of Impeachment
Democratic leaders in the House announced that they would move ahead with two articles of impeachment charging President Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
-
“Today, in service to our duty to the Constitution and to our country, the House Committee on the Judiciary is introducing two articles of impeachment, charging the president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, with committing high crimes and misdemeanors. The first article is for abuse of power. It is an impeachable offense for the president to exercise the powers of his public office to obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the national interest. That is exactly what President Trump did when he solicited and pressured Ukraine to interfere in our 2020 presidential election, thus damaging our national security, undermining the integrity of the next election, and violating his oath to the American people. These actions moreover are consistent with President Trump’s previous invitations of foreign interference in our 2016 presidential election. And when he was caught, when the House investigated and opened an impeachment inquiry, President Trump engaged in unprecedented, categorical and indiscriminate defiance of the impeachment inquiry. This gives rise to the second article of impeachment, for obstruction of Congress. Here too, we see a familiar pattern in President Trump’s misconduct. A president who declares himself above accountability, above the American people and above Congress’s power of impeachment, which is meant to protect against threats to our democratic institutions, is a president who sees himself as above the law.” “The evidence of the president’s misconduct is overwhelming and uncontested. And how could it not be, when the president’s own words on July 25, ‘I would like you to do us a favor though,’ lay so bare his intentions, his willingness to sacrifice the national security for his own personal interests? And when the president got caught, he committed his second impeachable act, obstruction of Congress, of the very ability to make sure that no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States. The evidence is every bit as strong that President Trump has obstructed Congress fully without precedent and without basis in law. If allowed to stand, it would decimate Congress’s ability to conduct oversight of this president or any other in the future, leaving this president and those who follow to be free to be as corrupt, malfeasant or incompetent as they would like, with no prospect of discovery or accountability.”
If the House follows through and impeaches the president next week, Mr. Trump would stand trial in the Senate early in the new year, Senator Mitch McConnell said Tuesday. The president has said he wants to see a robust defense of his actions in the Republican-controlled chamber, but Mr. McConnell has said the length of a trial is still subject to negotiation with Democrats.
Impeachment Inquiry
Latest Updates
Updated
Dec. 10, 2019
-
- House Democrats unveiled the articles of impeachment against Trump. They announced they would move to charge President Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress when the Judiciary Committee meets to consider articles of impeachment.
- The House Judiciary Committee held a daylong impeachment hearing that was largely a summary of evidence that followers of the inquiry would be familiar with, as staff lawyers for the Intelligence Committee presented their dueling reports on the investigation.
- Democratic committee lawyers used the hearing as a way to make opening arguments for impeachment articles. “The evidence is overwhelming,” said Barry Berke, a lawyer for the House Judiciary Committee. The facts assembled in recent weeks were “uncontradicted” and “cannot be disputed,” he added.
- A Republican staff lawyer said that Democrats were “obsessed with impeaching President Trump” and merely looking for a new way to do it. Steve Castor, the lawyer, said there was “simply no clear evidence” that Mr. Trump had “malicious intent in withholding a meeting or security assistance.”
- Staff lawyers cross-examined each other for the first time, which led to a lot of tension. Republican lawmakers bitterly complained when Mr. Berke, who appeared at a witness table at the start of the hearing to deliver his argument against Mr. Trump, later climbed onto the dais and led the cross-examination of Mr. Castor, an unusual move that Democratic rules allowed for.
- Jerry Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee, denied requests for Republican witnesses. Republicans have asked for two in particular: Representative Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and the anonymous whistle-blower.
Sign up for updates: Get the latest developments from the House impeachment inquiry in your inbox.
“We are obligated under the Constitution to turn to it when it comes over, and we will,” Mr. McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, told reporters.
Less than a year before the 2020 election, the action by the House sets up a historic and highly partisan constitutional clash between Mr. Trump and congressional Democrats — one that is likely to have broad political implications for both parties and exacerbate the divisions of a polarized nation.
But Democrats argued that the political calendar made their endeavor even more urgent, given the nature of the charges against the president. They said he had engaged in a troubling pattern of behavior that began when Mr. Trump welcomed Russia’s help in the 2016 election and would continue into 2020 if they did not stop it.
“The argument ‘Why don’t you just wait’ amounts to this: ‘Why don’t you just let him cheat in one more election?’” Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee who oversaw the House’s Ukraine investigation, said at a news conference. “Why not let him have foreign help just one more time?”
A small group of centrist House Democrats from districts Mr. Trump won in 2016 met behind closed doors on Monday and discussed the possibility of opposing the articles and instead trying to build bipartisan support for a resolution to formally censure the president. The idea would spare moderate lawmakers a difficult vote to support a highly partisan impeachment, followed by an all-but-inevitable acquittal in the Republican-controlled Senate. But the lawmakers agreed it had little real chance of success and dismissed the move.
Mr. Trump responded angrily to Democrats’ announcement, and used Twitter to proclaim their charge that he pressured Ukraine “ridiculous.”
The White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, accused Democrats of “manufacturing an impeachment inquiry and forcing unfounded accusations down the throats of the American people.” Their goal, she said, was to try to use the House’s impeachment power to weaken Mr. Trump’s chances of re-election.
“The announcement of two baseless articles of impeachment does not hurt the president, it hurts the American people, who expect their elected officials to work on their behalf to strengthen our nation,” Ms. Grisham said in a statement. “The president will address these false charges in the Senate and expects to be fully exonerated because he did nothing wrong.”
Speaking earlier Tuesday morning from a wood-paneled reception room just off the floor of the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and leaders of six key committees said that Mr. Trump’s actions toward Ukraine, and his efforts to block Congress’s attempt to investigate, had left them no choice but to pursue one of the Constitution’s gravest remedies. The move will bring a sitting president to the brink of impeachment for only the fourth time in American history.
“Our president holds the ultimate public trust,” Mr. Nadler said. “When he betrays that trust and puts himself before country, he endangers the Constitution, he endangers our democracy and he endangers our national security.”
While individual lawmakers will be able to propose amendments to the articles during this week’s debate and potentially force a committee vote on additional charges, the articles are not expected to substantively change.
Though the details differ substantially, the articles of impeachment that Democrats outlined on Tuesday echo those the Judiciary Committee approved in 1974 charging President Richard M. Nixon with abuse of power, obstruction of justice and contempt of Congress. Mr. Nixon resigned before the full House had a chance to vote on the articles, amid clear indications that the charges had broad support from members of both parties.
There is less overlap with the other modern presidential impeachment. In 1998, the House approved articles charging President Bill Clinton with perjury and obstruction of justice. Two other counts, of perjury and abuse of power, failed in votes on the House floor. It was that kind of split decision that Democratic leaders are determined to avoid this time.
The charges are all but certain to face monolithic Republican opposition. If that does not change, the impeachment vote could take place strictly along party lines, save for one independent, Representative Justin Amash of Michigan, who has signaled he will join Democrats.
Representative Peter T. King, a moderate New York Republican who is retiring and sometimes crosses the aisle to work with Democrats, echoed other members of his party when he denounced the articles as “shameless, baseless abuse of congressional power by House Democrats.
A handful of House Republicans who had earlier expressed openness to the possibility of impeaching Mr. Trump said on Tuesday that they intended to vote against the articles as drafted by Democrats. Several said they remained uncomfortable with Mr. Trump’s actions related to Ukraine but did not believe he should be removed from office.
“This is not to say that these things don’t disturb me,” said Representative John Curtis, Republican of Utah. “It’s not to say they don’t bother me. But that’s not the question at hand. The question is whether they are impeachable. I have to be frank — I just don’t see it.”
The impeachment effort faces an uphill battle in the Senate, where it would require the support of two-thirds of the chamber to convict Mr. Trump and remove him from office — a highly unlikely result.
The charges mirror the arguments Democratic lawyers for the Judiciary Committee and the Intelligence Committee made a day earlier when they argued that Mr. Trump’s behavior posed a “clear and present danger” to fair elections and national security.
Citing testimony from senior diplomats and White House officials, they summed up the case against Mr. Trump, asserting that he and his agents pressured Ukraine’s president to announce investigations of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and an unsupported claim that Democrats conspired with Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election. As part of the scheme, they asserted, Mr. Trump withheld a White House meeting and nearly $400 million in security assistance for the country as leverage.
They also said that Mr. Trump had systematically sought to halt their investigation by ordering government officials not to testify and refusing to hand over documents subpoenaed by the House related to the Ukraine matter.
Republicans pushed back against both conclusions, arguing that Democrats had manufactured a scandal against a president whose policies they despise. They argued that the evidence gathered by the House had not proved Mr. Trump was acting to benefit himself politically when he pressed Ukraine to announce investigations into his political adversaries.
“Despite years of witch hunts and investigations, Democrats have not produced a single piece of evidence that President Trump engaged in bribery, extortion, or any other high crimes or misdemeanors,” said Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the Republican whip. “Speaker Pelosi is bowing to the demands of the most radical elements of her base.”
Michael D. Shear contributed reporting.