r/politics • u/RB_Reich Robert Reich • Sep 26 '19
Let’s talk about impeachment! I'm Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor, author, professor, and co-founder of Inequality Media. AMA. AMA-Finished
I'm Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor for President Clinton and Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley. I also co-founded Inequality Media in 2014.
Earlier this year, we made a video on the impeachment process: The Impeachment Process Explained
Please have a look and subscribe to our channel for weekly videos. (My colleagues are telling me I should say, “Smash that subscribe button,” but that sounds rather violent to me.)
Let’s talk about impeachment, the primaries, or anything else you want to discuss.
244
u/BernieThrowaway_ Sep 26 '19
How do you think news of Trump's looming impeachment will affect the Democratic Primaries? Will Democrats who were more solidly in favor of impeachment get a boost, as if their messanging is being vindicated, or will it help those who were previously anti-impeachment, due to them getting the opportunity to change messaging? Also, do you think Democrats who previously didn't support it will come out of the woodwork strongly in favor of it, causing a feeding frenzy of sorts? How will this affect proceedings?
Thanks for the AMA, really excited to see the coming months. Thank you for your efforts in regards to pushing for this as well.
577
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
At this point, hard to tell, but my guess is that it helps Democrats because so many activists and likely voters say to themselves "finally, the Dems are standing up to this tyrant."
61
u/dreamedifice Sep 26 '19
My thoughts too! Every time people talk about how impeachment may energize the GOP base, they forget how much a lack of impeachment de -energizes the Dem base.
About half the Democrats I know have been furious at the party at least since Helsinki that the Dems haven’t begun impeachment.
This outrage taints the whole party, down ballot too. Many people I know have given up on the party, and consider them meek, devoid of principle, useless, etc.
This move will help the Democratic base much more than it helps the GOP base.
The GOP will use a lack of conviction by the Senate as proof of innocence. But they also used a lack of impeachment attempt as proof of innocence (even more so).
All I think is that it’s time to do what is right, and not worry about the politics or the outcome. Hell, the GOP tried to repeal the ACA 60-some times. Doomed, but their base demanded it. Would their base have tolerated them not doing it? It’s time that Democrats did something for Democrats and stopped worrying about the hypothetical swing voters. This is not the Clinton impeachment. There is very troubling criminal behavior. Give people some credit, the public may side with the impeachment.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Pylgrim Sep 27 '19
Every time people talk about how impeachment may energize the GOP base, they forget how much a lack of impeachment de -energizes the Dem base.
Thank you so much for putting it so succinctly.
33
u/Equoniz Sep 26 '19
Personally, my rep didn’t support the inquiry until after Pelosi announced it. He isn’t standing up to anyone, and I am going to do everything I can to get him primaried.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (8)40
211
u/postslongcomments Sep 26 '19
Pelosi had clearly been withholding any formal impeachment proceedings up until this point. In fact, it seems she had been "pulling away," until the whistleblower complaint was released.
From your analysis, does Pelosi this confidently beginning the process of impeachment seem to indicate that Pelosi/Democrats think they have something that, beyond a reasonable doubt, warrants impeachment?
That's what I'm leaning towards. It seems to be an incredibly risky move otherwise, especially so early into this 'scandal.'
445
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Pelosi is an incredibly shrewd politician. She would not have green-lighted impeachment unless she knew she had the votes for it, and that the activists (and likely voters) in the Democratic Party would be in favor -- or come to be in favor as more information comes out.
31
u/postslongcomments Sep 26 '19
Thanks for the response!
Do you think she feels confident that she can force a resignation or that the senate is potentially teetering with the information she has available? Or do think it'll stall after the house and end in a stalemate like Clinton. Today we saw necessary support from Ron Johnson (R-WI) in expressing his concern in a key swing state. He's been a career party liner that never really goes against the grain. Big shocker to me.
So are you leaning more towards this being a symbolic referendum to put the senate on record, or do you also have a lingering feeling that there going to be a "got 'em" trump card sitting in Pelosi's hand?
23
u/Campcruzo Sep 26 '19
How likely is it that Pence has to remain unscathed to build the golden bridge of retreat for Republicans to safely vote out Trump in an impeachment scenario?
→ More replies (1)12
u/lowlydanger Sep 26 '19
This comment gave me hope in a very bleak time, so thank you. I don't know why but I was comforted by it.
4
u/mutemutiny Sep 27 '19
Don't get it twisted - they didn't want to let that complaint get out. They only reluctantly released it in response to the big impeachment push, as a way to try and get ahead of the story and make it seem like they were always being forthcoming, but they had been trying to bury that complaint. We basically had to take this step just to force them to produce the complaint.
92
u/encarded Sep 26 '19
What is your reaction to Trump intimating that a whistleblower that followed procedure is equivalent to a treasonous spy, and that "in the old days when we were smart" things got handled differently (with the only obvious implication of this phrasing meaning hanging/death/etc)? Do you get the sense that anyone with power in Washington is actually tiring of the undermining of our basic structures with the inevitable "just kidding" excuse from the administration later?
→ More replies (1)259
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
The man is unhinged, unstable. He'll say anything. Try not to pay too much attention to what he says. Pay huge attention to what he does.
→ More replies (3)
171
u/LightningMcLovin California Sep 26 '19
Do you think there will need to be a "smocking gun" to take down Trump for his rampant criminality? Will there be legal consequences this time or another trademark American "need to heal" in the wake of his crime syndicate being stripped of power?
448
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
The transcript of the phone call to the president of Ukraine is already a smoking gun. Can you imagine if Mueller had uncovered a phone call between Trump and Putin in which Trump urged Putin to give him dirt on Clinton?
250
u/sonofaresiii Sep 26 '19
Can you imagine if Mueller had uncovered a phone call between Trump and Putin in which Trump urged Putin to give him dirt on Clinton?
Are you asking me to imagine what would happen if Mueller found evidence Trump committed crimes, and asked the governing body in power to use that evidence appropriately?
Because I can imagine that pretty easily, yeah.
→ More replies (2)36
u/_Sweet_TIL Sep 26 '19
Exactly. I’m trying to figure out why this smoking gun is smoking more than all the others? Why is this situation the one that’s finally getting folks riled up?
26
u/mutemutiny Sep 27 '19
First it happened WHILE he was president. Second, it wasn't someone in Trump's orbit, or a foreign power coming to him with information, it was TRUMP HIMSELF approaching THEM, and there was no national security or policy angle to this whatsoever, it was purely a political gambit and one that would only personally benefit Trump, so HE HIMSELF was using the office of the Presidency to extort another country using taxpayer money, for his own political gain AND to undermine the USA's democratic process. It's also dead to rights proof - he literally admitted to it - it's not something that is being alleged. HE ADMITTED TO IT, and it appears that a lot of people witnessed it. It's as open & shut a case as you could possibly ask for. His only defense at this point is "it's not a big deal!" - that's literally all he can say to try and cover for himself at this point, but even that is ridiculous. This is a massive, massive deal.
→ More replies (1)29
u/Gamewarrior15 America Sep 26 '19
This one lacks even a semblance of possible deniability
→ More replies (2)21
u/dreamedifice Sep 26 '19
And there’s just the difference in speed. The year+ to release propaganda and numb/normalize the public to the Russia scandal exceeded the national attention span.
This is happening fast, the administration keeps blundering, and they don’t have time to get their stories straight. They’re panicking and making it worse.
→ More replies (3)53
u/LightningMcLovin California Sep 26 '19
I should have said "audio" because I believed the Trump Tower meeting to be a pretty serious "smoking gun". There's nothing quite like audio to get the American people to take stuff seriously.
Thanks for your time Robert!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)25
u/other_vagina_guy Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 27 '19
Trump urged Putin to give him dirt on Clinton with a straight face live on national television. Mueller uncovered that Putin got dirt on Clinton an hour later.
That didn't stick. Let that sink in.
→ More replies (1)
233
u/labluewolfe Louisiana Sep 26 '19
Hi Robert, what are your thoughts on the general state of labor relations and the status of the working class in the United States today?
741
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Labor relations are worse than I've seen in a half century. Even though the U.S. economy is twice as large as it was in 1980, the median wage hasn't risen in 40 years, adjusted for inflation. Almost all the gains went to the top. This isn't sustainable.
→ More replies (21)53
u/Scarbane Texas Sep 26 '19
Feudalism lasted centuries. The gilded age lasted decades. What's different this time?
→ More replies (9)
140
Sep 26 '19
[deleted]
→ More replies (3)289
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
He could still be indicted and convicted of a federal crime, once he leaves office (arguably he could be indicted and convicted even in office). An impeachment is not considered a criminal conviction.
→ More replies (2)48
u/SilentR0b Massachusetts Sep 26 '19
And all those State crimes that will be waiting for him as well.
→ More replies (1)22
u/harveytaylorbridge Sep 26 '19
A vote for the Democrat presidential candidate in 2020 is also a vote to throw Trump to New York's DA. It's a special 2020 twofer.
→ More replies (1)
35
Sep 26 '19
What are the consequences of having a "nonleader" in the main leadership role in young, impressionable minds? How does this effect the way that youngsters view the world in the US?
89
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Good question. Young people today are more politically involved than I've seen in fifty years. They were more active and voted to a larger extent in the 2018 midterms than ever before. They're justifiably concerned about Trump's moves to destroy democracy, worsen climate change, and widen inequality. Having a "non-leader" in charge of America seems to be energizing them rather than making them more cynical. I'm grateful for this.
→ More replies (1)
104
u/jake-5043 Sep 26 '19
From what you’ve seen so far do you think this will actually go anywhere?
347
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
I doubt he'll be convicted of an impeachable offense -- so I don't think it will result in him leaving office. But I do think it important for Congress to draw a line, and say his actions are unacceptable. The Constitution has been violated, and the law of the land has been violated. To have done nothing in the face of this would make a mockery of our system.
→ More replies (1)61
u/carutsu Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 27 '19
I'm all for it but why this? How about the millions of dollars in emoluments? The naked nepotism? And so on. Your politics have devolved into third world country corruption. I mean it as a Mexican. Same evasion same bullshit we see here. Why now?
Any consecuences for Trump's enablers? Mitch "Moscow" McConnell, William Barr and Steven Mnuchin?
Dems always seem to snatch defeat from the claws of victory. Do you think they can screw it up?
Finally, Republicans have devolved into tyranny. I mean it. Any way the US will regain any actual moral standing?
→ More replies (3)11
u/mutemutiny Sep 27 '19
A big problem is that Americans aren't smart about the process or about what Trump has been doing. Not enough people know about the emoluments clause and how he's violating it, and so bringing impeachment based off that is politically unwise - yes, it would be the "right" thing to do, but it wouldn't be very popular with Americans, because they wouldn't understand it. Even this, many people are having a hard time understanding.
We would love to have some consequences for his enablers, the problem is that they're popular with their own voters, so if their own voters don't hold them accountable, we are very limited in what we can do. Most Americans don't get to vote for or against Mitch McConnell, only a small number of Americans get to do that, and most of them are moron Republicans - so it's unlikely he will face any consequences, but it's POSSIBLE. We are just limited in what we can actually do, depending on the person and their position.
→ More replies (4)
58
u/Turkin4tor Sep 26 '19
Assuming no shenanigans, about how much longer do you predict that trump will remain president? I've been trying to tell people that I think this will be a lot quicker than people may expect, but I don't know exactly how it's going to go
145
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
He'll be president until his term ends in January 2021, unless (1) he contests the 2020 election results and drags them through the federal courts, or (2) rigs the election. Sad to say, I think there's a 25 percent chance of both (1) and (2).
→ More replies (5)29
u/SgtSiggy Sep 26 '19
Ughhh... been saying this for a while now but hoped I was misguided. The (1) above is closer to 100% in my opinion if Trump thinks he will be convicted of crimes once he leaves the white house. He will self preserve with every option available as he always has.
→ More replies (1)10
u/expressly_ephemeral Sep 27 '19
Once John Roberts swears in the new president, the secret service or the FBI will remove the previous occupant from the building.
7
u/SgtSiggy Sep 27 '19
My vision is Trump holes himself up in the emergency bunker under the white house claiming "Dems are trying to hurt me!" and uses the cult staff he has to protect him.
Nothing has been easy with this president, and if he's facing life in jail (meaning no more hamberders) including the shame of a woke nation, he will try Putin-style shady moves.
The escalation to crazy town has no ceiling
→ More replies (3)
84
u/Samboono20 Sep 26 '19
Hey Mr. Reich! My father and I Are huge fans of you! I was curious about positive effects that impeachment’s has had on precedence with future impeachment hearings. I understand how impeachment works, but I’m not too familiar on what new investigative powers, if any, Congress has when they’re official in impeachment proceedings and how they differ from normal investigations. You’re a national treasure. Thank for your commitment to our country!
189
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
The federal courts are now considering a number of actions to enforce subpoenas against members of the Trump administration, which have been issued by the House. A formal impeachment puts some pressure on the courts to both enforce and expedite those subpoenas.
→ More replies (1)
155
u/Georgia-mudsquid Sep 26 '19
Do you think the Republicans will ever abandon trump and what do you think would have to happen for them to do so ?
464
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Unlikely as long as over 80 percent of Republican voters support Trump. The Republican Party of ten or 20 years ago is gone. In its place is something very different -- something close to a cult.
→ More replies (1)52
u/TheTaoThatIsSpoken Sep 26 '19
Do you honestly think the current Republican Party is significantly different from the Gingrich “moral majority” crowd?
→ More replies (8)21
u/7daykatie Sep 26 '19
It is. You can't pickle your brain in crap for decades and come out of that the same as when you went in.
→ More replies (3)
65
u/SwiftyShores Sep 26 '19
Do you expect any Republican senators to come out in support of impeachment (either in support of the House vote and/or in favor of conviction), and if so, how many, and who?
201
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Right now, Romney looks possible. Also Sasse. Perhaps Collins. I have heard from my "sources" that, if the vote were secret, 30 Republican Senators would already vote to impeach him.
46
u/Ashken Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 26 '19
Why does it have to be a secret? Are Republicans really putting their image ahead of a constitutional crisis?
I realized how silly that question was as I was typing it...Edit: I have a more nuanced question.
Seeing as how the Senate support of Trump is (more than likely) by proxy of their constituents, I think a much better question is: How come this isn't an action by Trump that even his base would frown upon? Obviously if a Dem president were doing this they would be absolutely livid. But, I would be too, as this should be a bipartisan issue. I could never see myself supporting a President so much that literally anything that they do in office is 100% tolerable. The moment the President does something as damning as this, I would rescind my support for them immediately, Republican or Democrat. What are we are actually seeing in our society right now? How is it that the President can damn near get away with murder and still be so heavily supported by the people?
9
u/CheesypoofExtreme Sep 27 '19
Honestly, it's a narrative thing. They choose to believe what's fed to them by Fox News and other far right-wing sources. There's not really any logic to it.
My uncle is someone that loves Trump. I considered (past tense) him to be a very reasonable and smart man. In most instances, he certainly is. But, he's also a bigot and loves what Trump says about immigration and the "radical" left. He'll just block out the negative narratives on Trump and eat up whatever bullshit is spewed by the Cheeto in Chief.
I'm a very logical person, so I have a hard time understanding WHY this is happening, but... It is. I'm assuming many Trump voters are similar to my uncle, and they just plug their ears and smile at their leader.
13
u/ThorVonHammerdong Sep 26 '19
Coming out against Trump is guaranteed election loss. Republican voters are absolutely rabid in their support of Trump.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)7
u/expressly_ephemeral Sep 27 '19
I keep hearing people tell me it's a mistake to dismiss the Trump supporter as a moron. I can't figure out why they can't independently compare what their response would be if Obama did this with their response today. I'm thinking it's maybe not a mistake to dismiss them as morons.
18
u/OFTHEHILLPEOPLE Sep 26 '19
We already got burned by Collins. I'll believe she will vote in the interest of the country when she does it instead of saying she'd do it.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)19
u/Dmriskus Sep 26 '19
Romney is positioning himself to be the next Ford. He'll toe the line unless the GOP decides to flip on Trump
→ More replies (1)
141
u/IHateFascism Sep 26 '19
In your professional opinion, will President Trump be impeached?
→ More replies (1)360
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
It's likely the House will impeach him, but I very much doubt the Senate will convict him -- because the Senate is in Republican hands. There's always the possibility that more damaging information will come out about Trump -- damaging enough that Senate Republicans will vote to convict him.
50
u/thedrew Sep 26 '19
Neither party has held a super-majority in the Senate for over 50 years. So you will almost always need bipartisan support for removal from office. What was the crossed line that moved Republicans against Nixon in 1974?
32
u/neuronexmachina Sep 26 '19
In Nixon's case it was the "smoking gun tape": https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/05/watergate-smoking-gun-tape-released-aug-5-1974-753086
On this day in 1974, the “smoking gun” tape was made public. At that point, Nixon’s remaining political support on Capitol Hill all but disappeared. The 10 Republican members of the Judiciary Committee who had voted against impeachment in committee announced that they would now vote for impeachment once the matter reached the House floor.
Nixon lacked support in the Senate as well. Sens. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.) and Hugh Scott (R-Pa.), the minority leader, told Nixon that no more than 15 senators were willing to even consider an acquittal. Facing impeachment by the House and near-certain conviction in the Senate, Nixon announced his resignation on the evening of Aug. 8, 1974, effective as of noon on the following day.
16
u/armcie Sep 26 '19
Its worth noting that Nixon resigned, before he was impeached, but (from wiki):
Even with support diminished by the continuing series of revelations, Nixon hoped to fight the charges. But one of the new tapes, recorded soon after the break-in, demonstrated that Nixon had been told of the White House connection to the Watergate burglaries soon after they took place, and had approved plans to thwart the investigation. In a statement accompanying the release of what became known as the "Smoking Gun Tape" on August 5, 1974, Nixon accepted blame for misleading the country about when he had been told of White House involvement, stating that he had had a lapse of memory.[229] Senate Minority Leader Hugh Scott, Senator Barry Goldwater, and House Minority Leader John Jacob Rhodes met with Nixon soon after. Rhodes told Nixon that he faced certain impeachment in the House. Scott and Goldwater told the president that he had, at most, only 15 votes in his favor in the Senate, far fewer than the 34 needed to avoid removal from office
So he misled the public. Something Trump seems to do several times a day.
→ More replies (13)6
u/mlw72z Georgia Sep 27 '19
Nixon resigned before he was even impeached by the house of representatives or convicted by the senate. It was widely thought that he would be convicted had he not resigned. I think the line was crossed easier then because politicians on both sides of the aisle had more honor and dignity than those from today.
→ More replies (11)32
u/taspdotext Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 26 '19
Canadian here: Does that mean the Senate can block the movement to impeach, or that it won't have an immediate criminal indictment?
Edit: Thanks for the explanation. I hope that the impeachment process is enlightening enough to overcome the difference in the Senate.
38
u/miguel__gusta Sep 26 '19
The House votes first, and only needs a simple majority of 437 members. The Dems have that much. Then it gets sent over to the Senate.
Conviction in the Senate, which triggers removal from office, then requires a 2/3 majority (67 of 100 senators). Only 47 Dems in the Senate, so they would need 20 Republicans to vote to convict. Unlikely, because they are swine.
Hence will pass the House (which is called being impeached), but unlikely to convict in the Senate (thus will likely not be removed from office).
→ More replies (10)45
Sep 26 '19
The House has sole power to impeach, and the Senate has sole power to try the impeachment.
Even though the House has the votes needed to impeach the POTUS, the likelihood that the Senate will convict the POTUS is still pretty low - as the Senate is currently controlled by Republicans.
→ More replies (10)22
u/sourapplemeatpies Sep 26 '19
Bill Clinton was impeached (the House voted to impeach him), but never removed from office because the Sentate never voted to convict him. Impeachment is only the first step.
The impeachment process is different from a criminal indictment. It isn't based on criminal laws, and can only ever remove a president from office (not send him to jail).
→ More replies (1)16
u/OliveGreen87 Nebraska Sep 26 '19
The house can impeach, or indict Trump. It's then handed over to Senate to charge/convict him; and they won't.
Impeachment does a few things here...makes Trump hopping mad, broadens the scope of what congress is allowed to investigate, and scars Trump's name in history for all time.
→ More replies (8)6
u/JamesIgnatius27 Sep 26 '19
Impeachment basically means the case goes to trial. The House of representatives votes on this and only needs a simple majority for impeachment to take place.
The trial is then presided over by the Chief Supreme Court Justice, with the 100 members of the Senate acting basically as the jury for the impeachment case. In order to convict him and remove him from office, 67% of the senate would need to vote to convict.
Since the current House is 54% Democrats and 46% Republicans, it is likely there will be the 50% needed to impeach. However, the current Senate is only 47% Dems and 53% Republicans, meaning all Dems plus an extra 20 Republican senators would need to vote against Trump for him to be removed from office, a pretty much impossible ask.
62
u/blkrockr Texas Sep 26 '19
The argument of complete immunity and not having to testify for senior aides has been brought up multiple times in this fight. Do you think there is a way to pierce or nullify this argument so that we can hear their testimony, if they actually decide to tell the truth under oath?
104
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
That argument is garbage. The federal courts -- ultimately the Supreme Court -- will weigh executive privilege (and immunity) against the interests of Congress and the public in overseeing the executive branch. I believe the courts will go with Congress on this.
→ More replies (9)
52
u/dougnn55 Sep 26 '19
What will it take for senate Republicans to jump on board?
96
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
As I said, public opinion -- especially among Republicans. Since Trump has positive approvals from about 88 percent of Republicans, it's unlikely that Republican opinion would swing against him -- but we don't know what else might be revealed. Anything is possible, especially with this man.
42
u/N0Tapastor Sep 26 '19
A poll out today shows that only 49% of Republicans would oppose impeachment if the allegations are found to be true (which is the crux of it, I guess). https://today.yougov.com/opi/surveys/results#/survey/72f3bf66-dee3-11e9-b4a9-9f0e9e31e4a3/question/9b91b2b7-dee3-11e9-ba0e-c7fcd6994022/politics
→ More replies (4)20
u/redpoemage I voted Sep 26 '19
Never underestimate what Republicans can convince themselves to be not true despite clear evidence though.
22
u/nxqv I voted Sep 26 '19
Do you think his approval amongst Republicans is this insanely high because the Republicans who didn't support him have jumped ship, or has the GOP just fallen completely in line?
→ More replies (3)
54
u/Iamien Indiana Sep 26 '19
If impeachment occurs, does that limit the PoTUS' powers at all?
118
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
If he's impeached, but not convicted (the most likely outcome), his powers are not affected at all. Yet he's put on notice by this impeachment that America is watching him, that a line has been drawn, that he cannot merely do whatever he wants in order to be reelected.
→ More replies (6)62
u/monalisafrank Sep 26 '19
Maybe a normal president. I don't think this is how Trump operates. If he is impeached but not convicted, I think what we'll get is an over the top narrative of "I WAS SET UP BUT THEY DIDN'T WIN! THEY LIED! THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING!" and that will energize his base, confuse uninformed voters, and make Dems more pessimistic than they were before...
→ More replies (4)
31
u/Cheetohkat New Hampshire Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 26 '19
What parts of the whistleblowers complaint are the best arguments for impeachment?
Do you see anything that should perhaps be getting more attention than it is? Or any pieces that are being blown out of proportion?
79
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
The biggest thing that's not being talked about right now is the most obvious -- that Trump will do anything to get reelected, and if the Democrats and the courts, as well as principled Republicans, aren't vigilant against campaign violations between now and the 2020 election, Trump will do just about anything.
38
Sep 26 '19
Donald Trump has begun using impeachment as "evidence" of some kind of coup. What kind of actions could Trump take in response, and is it something we should be concerned about moving forward with the inquiry?
93
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
He will do absolutely anything that he thinks he can get away with, and right now he thinks he can get away ==with almost anything. So buckle up.
22
u/nev77 Sep 26 '19
I'm tired of working for corporations, only to be paid a garbage wage, having no control of my workplace and being a seasonal, temp or part-time worker, never a full-time worker with benefits. Therefore, I decided to start my own political organization. My question is, do you see more people like me becoming more entrepreneurial as more people wake up to the fact that most corporations hate workers? Thanks
→ More replies (1)47
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
I hope so. It's not that corporations "hate" workers; it's that corporations don't exist for workers -- they exist for shareholders or private-equity fund managers.
52
u/IamnotHorace Europe Sep 26 '19
Some narratives I have seen from GOP that you can help educate us on.
Does there have to be an underlying crime to meet High Crimes and Misdemeanor threshold?
Is abuse of public office for personal benefit enough?
What are limitations of Executive Privilege?
Does a President's article 2 powers mean they can utilize those powers with corrupt intent, with no sanction available?
→ More replies (1)65
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
- No.
- Yes.
- Didn't help Richard Nixon.
- No (see Nixon, R.)
→ More replies (7)
156
u/Jwoom0818 Ohio Sep 26 '19
How much does public opinion factor into an impeachment process?
354
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
A great deal. Impeachment is less a legal process than it is a political one. If most Americans find Trump's behavior to be outrageous, and decide he should no longer be in office, even Senate Republicans could come around.
→ More replies (49)
32
u/1389t1389 Sep 26 '19
It's an honor to talk to you, sir.
What do you think would be the most efficient way to hold the President accountable through impeachment- would including information from the Mueller report help, or should it stay limited to the events surrounding this call with Zelensky?
86
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
If it were up to me, I'd keep it clean and simple. The Zelensky request is clearly illegal, and easily understandable to the public. Can you imagine what would happen if foreign powers routinely thought they could curry favor with a president by digging up dirt on potential rivals?
→ More replies (1)
59
u/AlephPlusOmega Sep 26 '19
What recourse is there for lower level officials such as Barr, or Giulianni?
156
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Barr should be impeached. Giulianni is a private citizen, who probably broke a number of laws by appearing to represent the United States; he should be prosecuted.
181
u/protekt0r New Mexico Sep 26 '19
Can Mitch McConnell singularly block impeachment in the senate?
332
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
No. The Constitution gives authority to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to preside over a Senate impeachment hearing.
210
Sep 26 '19
Fun fact: The only place in the Constitution that indicates that the Supreme Court has to have a Chief Justice is with respect to impeachment
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (16)34
u/protekt0r New Mexico Sep 26 '19
Thank the heavens for that! Although I disagree with Chief Roberts on many of his views, I do find him to be a faithful defender of the Constitution and a patriot.
11
u/spiderlanewales Ohio Sep 27 '19
This is where a hardcore "constitutionalist" might come in handy. SCOTUS justices have nothing to lose, they're appointed for life, it shouldn't matter to them who appointed them.
73
Sep 26 '19
There are those who fear a Trump acquittal and subsequent bump.
What's your take on that?
→ More replies (10)171
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
He won't be acquitted by the House. The evidence is clear that he tried to get the government of a foreign nation to dig up dirt on his likely political rival. Ergo, no Trump bump.
→ More replies (45)
27
u/PandAlex Sep 26 '19
Hello Secretary Reich,
I know that you were a fervent Bernie supporter and advocate in the 2016 election. Do you still believe in Bernie or are there other candidates that sway you this time around?
72
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
I support Bernie and Elizabeth Warren. Other Dem candidates impress me as well.
→ More replies (2)
17
u/prospectre California Sep 26 '19
Can you give us a brief rundown of what you think will happen with Trump, starting from the Ukraine scandal?
41
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
He'll try to fog it up by making Biden the center of his accusations, as he did with HRC. He won't succeed, but he'll create enough doubt (and give Fox News enough talking points) that Trump's base will probably stay with him, at least over the next month or two. The big unknown is what other facts or issues come out during the impeachment inquiry.
→ More replies (1)
16
u/kcapulet Sep 26 '19
Hi from Berkeley!
Non impeachment question: What do you think the 2020 Democratic candidates should be doing today that they're not already doing or doing well enough to win in 2020?
59
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
They're doing a great job because they're not just hammering Trump; they're also proposing a range of important policies. Frankly, it's the most impressive roster of Democratic presidential candidates I've seen in my lifetime.
23
u/jkm9000 Oregon Sep 26 '19
What do you think it will take for the GOP to go into self preservation mode and move against Trump? Are we close to that moment yet?
45
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
If polls show that Trump support starts dropping among likely Republican voters, we could see the GOP start to move against him.
→ More replies (2)
40
u/jakobpinders Oregon Sep 26 '19
Trump claimed he would try to stop the impeachment inquiry through the courts, is this possible?
113
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
If Trump had any legal basis for such a try, I'd say it was possible -- but he has none, so it's not.
16
u/dontknowwhybutimhere I voted Sep 26 '19
How likely is it that we see Trump criminally prosecuted at the end of his presidential tenure, whether it be through the 2020 election or impeachment process?
43
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
If he's not reelected in 2020, the statute of limitations would not bar criminal prosecution of Trump on any number of issues.
→ More replies (5)
31
u/theMediatrix Sep 26 '19
If Trump is impeached, do we then have to wait out a second process to impeach Pence? Can they both be impeached and removed at the same time?
→ More replies (2)
52
u/ILoveToVoidAWarranty Michigan Sep 26 '19
Would pushing for an impeachment without a reasonable shot at conviction be a tactical error on the part of the Democrats?
→ More replies (3)174
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Hard to say. I could argue that not pushing for impeachment would be a tactical error, because it would make many Democrats (and independents) even more cynical about our system of government, and therefore less likely to show up at the polls on Election Day.
17
u/magtig California Sep 26 '19
Thank you for answering that, and OP for asking. Impeachment actually helped Clinton. That's what I see everywhere when it gets brought up, but what I don't see is a discussion about why. Clinton was impeached for a blow job by a blow hard with a hard on to grind an axe, Ken Starr. It was bullshit and people knew it. This impeachment scenario with Trump is actually substantive, despite the fact that people continue to speak about impeachment as a monolith. Do you (or anyone) agree with my assessment, and that this issue of substance might make all the difference in terms of public political ramifications? Am I missing anything?
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (2)23
u/SubjectiveHat Sep 26 '19
already as cynical as I can get without being suicidal. still showing up to vote. it's all you can do short of literally laying down your life for change...
→ More replies (2)
10
u/N0Tapastor Sep 26 '19
Hi, Secretary Reich! I audited one of your classes at Cal back in 200 when I was a student at the Graduate Theological Union. It was great!
There's been a lot of talk about how the impeachment process will hurt the Dems in 2020 once Trump is ultimately "vindicated" by a lack of conviction in the Senate. However, if the process plays out quickly I think our collective attention is so short these days that some other news will likely overshadow impeachment by next November. Is there any way that Dems can speed up the process so it is resolved well before the election?
27
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
The Dems need the federal courts to enforce the subpoenas they've issued. That's the only thing that will slow down the process.
11
u/jrizos Oregon Sep 26 '19
Do you see a way in which this Ukraine whistle blower case can amount to "just talk" or "business as usual" for a POTUS? What more is this going to take?
37
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
For two and a half years, Trump has tried to normalize his abnormal and destructive behavior. He'll continue to try. It's up to the rest of us to keep reminding each other how abnormal and destructive he is.
7
u/jkateel California Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 26 '19
Mr. Reich: Is the trial like other types of trials? Can the president's other conduct--say having the military stay at his golf course in Scotland--be used as evidence against his character or lend credence to the idea that he's using his power for political/financial gain? Or does it have to solely focus on what the House charges him with, i.e., encouraging a foreign country to go after his political rivals? (And could the Mueller report be used for that charge?)
25
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Impeachment and Senate trial can include anything -- including Trump's blatant violation of the "emoluments clause" of the Constitution, which bars using the office for personal gain with regard to foreign officials, and other laws that bar use of office for personal gain domestically.
17
u/GDJT Sep 26 '19
How many people can the House be working on impeaching at the same time?
30
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
I'd think that the public's bandwidth is already stretched pretty thin. Let's keep it to Trump -- and maybe Barr.
26
u/NordicNacho Minnesota Sep 26 '19
So is this actually happening or no?
77
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
The formal impeachment is happening. But as I'm emphasizing, there's a world of difference between being impeached and being convicted in the Senate.
12
u/NordicNacho Minnesota Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 26 '19
Thanks for the reply to my less than sophisticated question.
Follow up if you see it: What in your mind would it take to get 20 Republican Senators to take that plunge?
→ More replies (6)
36
u/ValiantCorvus Georgia Sep 26 '19
Is there any feasible way that the impeachment process could come to a final vote in the Senate before the 2020 elections?
64
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Yes, but it's highly unlikely that the Senate would convict.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/StrDstChsr34 Sep 26 '19
Are there any indications so far that VP Pence is involved in any of this? And do you think from what is known so far that this has the potential to end up with the impeachment of both AG Barr and SS Pompeo as well?
30
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Haven't seen anything on Pence, but in my view Barr is very vulnerable to impeachment.
16
u/OregonTripleBeam Sep 26 '19
What are the odds that impeachment actually occurs? What is the most likely thing that could prevent it from happening beyond just an unwillingness by Senate Rs for purely political purposes?
→ More replies (1)
11
u/cwm13 Sep 26 '19
Given the continuous downward trend we've seen in private labor union membership over the last 50 years, what do you think is the largest mistake union leadership is making in regards to recruitment and organization and what would be the most impactful change they could make to turn this trend around?
23
23
u/AnakinAmidala Oklahoma Sep 26 '19
Is it possible that House Democrats have information and facts that are yet to be revealed to the public?
→ More replies (1)
31
Sep 26 '19
Can campaign finance violations in the lead up to the 2016 election be considered by Congress as part of an impeachment inquiry?
→ More replies (1)
32
Sep 26 '19
Think there's any chance of Barr getting impeached as well?
120
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
I hope so. The man has no loyalty to the United States. He's a lapdog for Trump. He should not be Attorney General.
12
u/Kalliopenis Sep 26 '19
If the Senate doesn’t convict and he doesn’t resign, is it possible for the President to be impeached multiple times? On totally unrelated but no less concurrent illegal activity?
→ More replies (3)
9
u/SilverCommon Wisconsin Sep 26 '19
Hey there! Do you think this impeachment will boost Trump's popularity, similar to Clinton's?
29
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
No. I think Americans are very dug in with regard to Trump. Those who support him will continue to; those who don't, will continue to. Very few Americans haven't made up their minds about him.
→ More replies (1)
92
u/DriveForFive Sep 26 '19
Thank you for being the voice we need these past few years.
→ More replies (3)
8
u/Snprisoner Sep 26 '19
As former Labor Secretary, how should future Democrats use the power of the Labor Department to improve the lives of Americans?
24
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Raise the threshold for wages subject to overtime, enforce worker safety laws more vigorously, protect worker pensions more vigorously.
→ More replies (2)
19
u/yungkoffsyrup Sep 26 '19
What's the historical precedent for impeachment?
67
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Only 2 presidents have been impeached (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton) -- Richard Nixon resigned before he was impeached because he saw the writing on the wall -- but no president has been convicted of impeachment by the Senate.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/W1nt3rmute Sep 26 '19
Let's say impeachment occurs, and proceedings move to the senate. Can't the GOP continue with Trump's success with Pence at the helm, primarily appointing all the judges they wanted and standing up to Chinese as far as trade goes? That way they can save face with their constituents, and maintain their seats while still getting their agenda through?
Conservative liberal here, btw.
41
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Yes, Trump will continue to appoint right-wing lobbyists to his administration and right-wing judges to the courts. Nothing will stop him unless or until he is thrown out of office by the 2020 election. Let me add that it's just as important to flip the Senate and get Mitch McConnell out of his office. Trump is unhinged, but McConnell is venal.
→ More replies (2)
6
Sep 26 '19
How do you view NAFTA’s successes and failures in light of history, and how might that be different if 2016 had gone to Clinton?
13
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
NAFTA proved itself to be neither as helpful as its backers believed at the time, nor as damaging as its detractors argued at the time.
→ More replies (1)
19
4
u/JRRTrollkin Sep 26 '19
Hi Mr. Reich! I just want to say I've been a huge fan of your documentaries, Facebook videos, etc. It brightens my day every time I see one of your videos pop up in my newsfeed because I follow Inequality Media.
It has been a very difficult time with seeing what has happened to the GOP since Goldwater vs Johnson to now. I often wonder: Where will this end? Will we allow inequality to continue until this country turns into a war zone?
So: my question: Do you have any books that you would recommend that we should read to help educate ourselves? I've read "Capitalism without Capital", "Fortress America" and "The Great Revolt" recently. What do you recommend?
Keep up the great work!
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Whiteness88 Puerto Rico Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 28 '19
Hello, Robert. I've followed you for years due to your ability to take complex issues and boil it down into simple terms that makes it easier to learn about tax policies, economics, etc.
This Ukraine story seems to be sticking in a way that none of the other scandals have. Why do you think that is?
11
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
It's simple to understand. Trump asked a foreign power to dig up dirt on a political rival. That's illegal. Period.
6
Sep 26 '19
Thank you very much for taking your time to do an AMA. I watched your documentary Inequality of All and was a big fan. I was hoping you could answer some of my questions.
My primary question of today is whether you believe universal income is a practical way to combat the rise of automation? I bring this up not to support or deride candidates that support the idea, but rather because I can’t see an alternative method to keep people with income in the future.
My other question is if you believe whether the United States can enact “green labor” nationwide? What I mean by that is you think it is possible to supply the labor force with jobs that don’t accelerate climate change.
Again, thank you for doing this AMA
23
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
We need a universal subsistence wage that prevents people from falling into dire poverty. And, yes, there are tens of thousands of potential "green" jobs.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/nxqv I voted Sep 26 '19
We keep seeing reports about Pence being caught up in this too, and in his UN speech today Trump said to "look at Mike Pence's calls." If Pence really is just as guilty as Trump, how could Congress go about impeaching both of them in a way that ensures that Pence never touches the Presidency? Would they even be able to handle the load of multiple impeachments?
11
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
My own judgment is that it would become far too complicated if Pence is included in an impeachment. The key is to keep it simple.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/StandWithIlhan Sep 26 '19
Professor Reich! I'm a huge fan. How likely is the GOP to abandon Trump and remove him from office?
→ More replies (1)
4
Sep 26 '19
Hey robert! Welcome!
Because it’s pretty much the consensus that the senate is unlikely to remove from office:
1) what are the chances trump (ala Nixon) would resign
2) what conditions, if any, would have to be different for the senate as it currently stands to vote to remove from office?
→ More replies (2)
2
Sep 26 '19
[deleted]
6
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
America probably wouldn't accept the degree of social safety net France and Germany have established, but I think we'd eagerly accept paid family leave, 5 weeks of vacation, and also Germany's system of having a supervisory board overlooking corporations, composed of workers as well as managers.
3
u/_Tovarish_ New York Sep 26 '19
Hi Robert! Do you think it is feasible to impeach the president on the multiple violations made over the past three years, or would it be better to try and pin him down on this singular scandal with Ukraine?
→ More replies (1)
3
Sep 26 '19
Is this it, Robert? Have we finally reached the turning point? Or should I get back to my nap?
→ More replies (5)
3
u/LaFlamaBlancaMiM Sep 26 '19
Just wanted to stop by and say I love your shit. Thanks for being so outspoken about equality and opportunity for all Americans.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/hueyzln Sep 26 '19
Do you think this is politically motivated and is there any chance of republican support?
→ More replies (2)
-1
17
u/redpoemage I voted Sep 26 '19
Some seem to be of the opinion that Democrats should try to impeach Trump for all the many crimes he has committed to make clear the extent of his lawlessness, while others think focusing solely on the Ukraine issue due to its clarity and ease of selling to the American public would be a better political strategy.
Do you have any opinions on this? Are there any precedent setting implications if Trump is impeached on a sole issue despite there being many impeachable crimes?
→ More replies (3)
386
u/RB_Reich Robert Reich Sep 26 '19
Thanks so much for joining me. Great questions. Let's do this again!
Robert Reich
→ More replies (4)223
Sep 26 '19 edited Jul 07 '21
[deleted]
102
u/Sanctimonius Sep 26 '19
I'm saying this with all honesty and seriousness - I don't know if Rudy is an inside agent to bring down Trump or not. Like, genuinely. Everything he has done since he became Trump's personal lawyer has set Trump back horribly.
74
→ More replies (7)27
u/DANNYBOYLOVER Sep 27 '19
Anyone who has lived in New York knows that he is in fact, that dumb
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (23)51
8
u/_treasonistrump- Sep 26 '19
Thank you Sec Reich.
Couldn’t McConnel just refuse to schedule an impeachment trial? There is no timeline in the constitution, and, as we saw with Garland, Moscow Mitch doesn’t care about precedence. I believe he would easily say that it’s too close to the election and that he will ‘let the voters decide’ if he believes that that would be better for the GOP.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/ATastefulCrossJoin Sep 26 '19
In your opinion, does a successful impeachment come with the unintended consequence of further galvanizing the president’s already politically isolated base? It seems to me this could be a double edged sword if it reinforces a misguided but very firmly held persecution complex
→ More replies (3)
1.1k
u/[deleted] Sep 26 '19 edited Sep 26 '19
Imagine you’re starving. Haven’t eaten in days. Congress unanimously decides to give you a cheeseburger. The president shows up and stands in front of you with that cheeseburger. There’s even a label on the cheeseburger that has your name on it. You KNOW that cheeseburger is meant for you. You have a conversation with the president. You suck up to him and his ego because you’re starving and just cannot wait to get your hands on that cheeseburger. Finally, you mention the cheeseburger, and the president’s literal next words are “I want you to do a favor for me though” and then asks you to do something. Then he walks away still holding on to YOUR cheeseburger.
Meanwhile, both sides of congress ask the president why he won’t give you your cheeseburger. He was SUPPOSED to give you that cheeseburger. He doesn’t give an answer, deflects, and finally gives two separate conflicting reasons why he wouldn’t give you that cheeseburger.
Is this a good analogy of the situation to describe the the implication of quid pro quo? If so, is the implication in and of itself impeachable?