Sean Wilentz at Rolling Stone:
There have been earlier impeachments and interferences with democratic institutions in our history, but nothing like this one. In this, as he likes to say, Trump truly stands alone. He has assaulted American democracy, claimed he has the authority to do so, and dared anybody to do anything about it, dismissing with contempt Congress’ clear constitutional authority to oversee and check the executive branch. He thinks he can use the office of the presidency as a personal instrument, along with private emissaries, to desecrate the rule of law and then protect himself from the consequences. He even declares in publicthat he is the law, claiming that, according to Article II of the Constitution, “I have the right to do whatever I want as president.” Not even the most corrupt and criminal of our previous presidents has tried to pervert our most sacred institutions as openly as Trump has.
Barbara McQuade lays out the administration’s strategy:
This is one of President Trump’s favorite gaslighting moves — to not only deny the accusations, but to suggest that it is actually his opponent who is the wrongdoer. Trump demonstrated this tactic during a debate with Hillary Clinton: When she accused him of being a puppet for Russian president Vladimir Putin, he responded by calling her a puppet (his memorable phrase: “No puppet. No puppet. You’re the puppet!”). No matter that the accusation was a complete non sequitur.
At The New Yorker, Susan Glasser points out that Republicans are comfortable criticizing Trump over his decisions in Syria but not Ukraine:
Trump’s abandonment of the Kurds is certainly an outrage, and a black mark on America’s national honor. But at this particular moment the Republican fury at the President over the decision seems like an almost incomprehensible act of hypocrisy. How is it different from Trump’s threatened abandonment of the Ukrainians—and his apparent blackmailing of them for nakedly personal, political reasons? Putting aside the potential high crimes and misdemeanors involved with Trump’s Ukraine play, isn’t countering Russia in an active war zone on Europe’s eastern flank at least as important a security interest for the United States? How is it even controversial for a Republican member of Congress to say that congressionally appropriated military aid should not be contingent on demanding a political favor for the President?
On a final note, and speaking of Republicans, former Romney advisor Gabriel Schoenfeld calls on those who have served in the administration to make public what they know about Trump’s conduct:
America’s top generals, most seasoned diplomats and a leading businessman have served under President Donald Trump and had the opportunity to observe him closely. They include retired Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, his former chief of staff; former Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson, his former secretary of State; retired Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, his former secretary of Defense; and retired Army Lieutenant Gen. H.R. McMaster and former ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, both former national security advisers to Trump. Each of these distinguished public servants evidently believes it is a matter of honor to keep their peace about a president who put them in a position of high responsibility.
But each of them has also sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Here is a case where honor and duty collide. Like the public at large, every one of these former high-ranking officials has witnessed unseemly behavior that renders Trump unfit to occupy the White House and serve as commander in chief. But what, bearing on Trump’s character, have they witnessed behind closed doors, in the situation room and in the Oval Office? With the future of our constitutional order hanging in the balance, don’t they have an obligation to speak the truth and inform the public?