[ad_1]
Almost every passing day, Trump gives a glimpse of what the US government might have under a president who disdains the principles and pillars on which he rests.
A strong economy, extreme political polarization and the daily struggles of millions of people to pay for basic necessities such as health care and university education are naturally considered more important.
And any impression in the heart of the country that the latest tragedy would be a new episode of torture in an era of political alienation would have been enhanced by theatrical action in the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
A hearing in which the Democrats held Attorney General William Barr in defiance of charges with enough tyranny and hypocrisy to pit anyone against politics – and in an atmosphere rather than material – seemed like routine in the divided capital.
Significant deterioration
But Wednesday's developments were different. Two branches of the government in conflict are likely to ask the third – the judiciary – to settle their dispute.
"We are now in a constitutional crisis," told reporters Jerry Nadler, president of the Judiciary Assembly of the House of Representatives of New York, who had previously avoided the term.
Republican Louie Gohmert of Texas was equally alarmist, but he accused an excessive majority of causing the imbroglio.
"You are on the wrong side of history," he told the Democrats, claiming that the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign and its alleged links with Russia in 2016 constituted a coup d'etat. State against the Presidency.
On the contrary, the issue is now even more important than whether Trump prevented justice during the investigation into the Mueller case or the contempt charge to court. against Barr, which will have little practical effect on the Attorney General's ability to function.
These are issues that will end with this administration in two or six years.
But Trump's refusal to abide by the long traditions that govern relations between Congress and the presidency is at the heart of American democracy and could change it for future generations.
The presumed claim of the president on the executive's privilege over Mueller's entire unredacted report after the Democrats issued a subpoena demanding that his handover be beyond his previous efforts to evade the Congressional oversight, crossing an important line.
If the bet is valid, it suggests that a president may simply ignore the tools designed to allow Congress to verify its power and review its actions. He will not face any significant penalty. Once this threshold has been crossed, future administrations may not be able to go back.
"This is not a normal partisan event because the president invokes the privilege of the executive in an extremely broad way," said Corey Brettschneider, professor of political science at the University. Brown.
"It's hard to think of an example like this one, which is so fundamental in the US Constitution: Not only does Congress develop laws and the president, but part of the legislative function is to exercise control.
"Without the power of subpoena, it's hard to know how they can perform essential duties," said Brettschneider, author of "The Oath and the Office: A Guide to the Constitution for the Future." Presidents ".
Turning in their graves
Leon Panetta, who was head of the White House's staff for Bill Clinton, told CNN that presidents usually chose battles of executive privileges with Congress.
But Trump, consistent with his indifference to checks and balances, his domineering personality and his willingness to break the norms in force, has chosen a comprehensive approach and resists monitoring Congress as a whole.
"Our ancestors have to turn in their graves," Panetta told Brianna Keilar of CNN. "Our forefathers made it clear that they did not want power to be centralized in a branch of government, particularly in a king or president."
Many analysts believe that at the end of the potentially lengthy legal battle on several fronts, the courts end up siding with Congress for its power to compel testimony.
As a result of this decision, President Richard Nixon had to hand over incriminating recordings of his discussions with his key collaborators to a federal court, which accelerated the end of his term.
The prosecution argued that, with such conduct, Nixon had assumed for himself the powers conferred on the House by the Constitution.
The fight for the privilege of the executive and the barrage of assignments are not the only areas where Trump challenges the presidential power.
A new conflict erupted on Wednesday when House Intelligence Speaker Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, issued a new subpoena to Barr for all foreign intelligence and counter-intelligence documents produced during the investigation. Mueller after repeated requests failed.
"As the Special Advocate and the Department of Justice have acknowledged, the Congress plays a vital constitutional role in assessing misconduct by the executive, including the Speaker, as well as for evaluate and refine laws that deal with the "systematic and systematic" invasion of our people by Russia, "said Schiff in a statement.
"So we need these materials to do our job, the walls of the ministry are simply unacceptable."
There was no immediate response from the Department of Justice. But if the past behavior of the administration is a guide, Washington should be preparing for another controversy over the scope of congressional power.
[ad_2]
Source link