Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:31 PM Jan 2018

Even if Trump is blatantly ignoring the Russia sanctions law, theres not a lot Congress can do

Last edited Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:05 PM - Edit history (2)

The bashing of Dem leaders here on DU for "NOT DOING SOMETHING!!!!" should be tempered with and understanding of what the actual options are, especially for a party in the minority.

“I wouldn't necessarily say Congress is out of options,” said Cornell law professor Josh Chafetz, who recently wrote a book on Congress's tools for checking the White House. “I would say that, with Republicans controlling both chambers, it's less likely to utilize certain options.”

So what are those unlikely options? Let's run them down:

Congress could sue the president for allegedly breaking the law, but legal experts said courts tend to side with the executive branch on questions such as these. The sanctions law says Trump can avoid implementing them if he proves that Russia has made significant efforts to stop hacking into U.S. elections systems. It's not clear whether he's done that behind the scenes and the public just doesn't know about it.
........................................
Congress's main power is the power of the purse. Lawmakers could try to withhold funding from the State Department until it implements the sanctions. But that's only slightly less risky than suing the president, because Congress could get blamed for handicapping U.S. diplomats. Plus, Congress has struggled since September to pass any budget, so this might be an empty threat.

The Senate could hold up judicial nominees, but that's also unlikely. The speedy rate at which Trump has nominated conservative judges and at which Senate Republicans have subsequently approved them was one of the party's potentially most lasting (if under-the-radar) accomplishments in 2017.

Congress could hold hearings designed to criticize and even embarrass the Trump administration about this decision. Consider it Congress's version of browbeating, Chafetz said. If Congress does anything at all, this is the likeliest option, and it could at least help lawmakers highlight their frustration with Trump's inaction.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/01/30/even-if-trump-is-blatantly-ignoring-the-russia-sanctions-law-theres-not-a-lot-congress-can-do-about-it/
44 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Even if Trump is blatantly ignoring the Russia sanctions law, theres not a lot Congress can do (Original Post) ehrnst Jan 2018 OP
Congress can impeach him for obstruction of justice and abuse of power YessirAtsaFact Jan 2018 #1
You think that a GOP congress is going to do that? You have to have a majority to do that. ehrnst Jan 2018 #2
I said they can-I didnt say they will YessirAtsaFact Jan 2018 #3
Democrats *can* impeach him? I don't think you understand what is required to impeach... ehrnst Jan 2018 #6
The OP is talking about Congress, not just Democrats YessirAtsaFact Jan 2018 #10
That's the Constitutional remedy for this sort of thing. Dave Starsky Jan 2018 #11
That would require GOP to get on board if they are the majority, wouldn't it? ehrnst Jan 2018 #14
Not bloody likely. Dave Starsky Jan 2018 #20
OK, then without the GOP onboard, there isn't a constitutional remedy no matter how many ehrnst Jan 2018 #28
At Least All Dems Should Be in Front Of Microphones & ..... global1 Jan 2018 #25
You mean like Schumer? And McCaskill? And Schiff? ehrnst Jan 2018 #29
You mean like this? ehrnst Jan 2018 #34
I see Dems in front of mikes every day mcar Jan 2018 #43
Yeah, "not a lot Congress can do" is BS. lagomorph777 Jan 2018 #42
But if it is done as a quid pro quo... kentuck Jan 2018 #4
What would be done as a quid pro quo? ehrnst Jan 2018 #8
This is what the whole Russian investigation is about... kentuck Jan 2018 #18
From the article: ehrnst Jan 2018 #21
oh man i disagree here bluestarone Jan 2018 #5
Please list their options. Plenty of space below. ehrnst Jan 2018 #12
onlyn 2 that i care about bluestarone Jan 2018 #17
Again, you think that the GOP is going to impeach? They are the majority. ehrnst Jan 2018 #22
again i said COULD bluestarone Jan 2018 #24
You "could" what? ehrnst Jan 2018 #30
It can be the eighty-eighth article of impeachment... Orsino Jan 2018 #7
You mean when we have a majority? ehrnst Jan 2018 #9
Hell, I wouldn't hold my breath... Orsino Jan 2018 #13
Why? Do you think Dems won't use their majority? ehrnst Jan 2018 #15
It will depend on how big the majority is... Orsino Jan 2018 #16
You think Dem leaders won't work to make Trump accountable if they are the majority? ehrnst Jan 2018 #26
I recommended aginst holding one's breath. Orsino Jan 2018 #32
"By definition a slow process." ehrnst Jan 2018 #33
My revenge fantasies mostly key on criminal proceedings. Orsino Jan 2018 #35
Oh, I have some revenge fantasies. ehrnst Jan 2018 #36
Working to make Trump accountable mcar Jan 2018 #44
This Is Just Another Instance Where We Let Trump Off The Hook.... global1 Jan 2018 #19
How have we "let Trump off the hook?" What was available to get him "on the hook?" ehrnst Jan 2018 #27
Some people need visuals. brer cat Jan 2018 #23
Yes, that would be completely different. ehrnst Jan 2018 #31
More like "not a lot Congress *wants* to do about it. no_hypocrisy Jan 2018 #37
The norms are gone, folks. The mad Captain Queeg is at the helm procon Jan 2018 #38
The Dems could run this year on this issue, and they will Johonny Jan 2018 #39
Let's all work our ass off to retake the House and then the Senate. Ligyron Jan 2018 #40
Hasn't McConnell taken away Ds ability to place holds on judicial noms? mcar Jan 2018 #41
 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
2. You think that a GOP congress is going to do that? You have to have a majority to do that.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:36 PM
Jan 2018

You seem to have more faith in the GOP than I do.

Perhaps you have heard of some that will?

Please share.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
6. Democrats *can* impeach him? I don't think you understand what is required to impeach...
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:42 PM
Jan 2018

It requires a majority, and we don't have that.....

Dave Starsky

(5,914 posts)
11. That's the Constitutional remedy for this sort of thing.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:45 PM
Jan 2018

But it assumes that the Congress and Senate actually give a shit about that.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
14. That would require GOP to get on board if they are the majority, wouldn't it?
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:47 PM
Jan 2018

How likely is that?

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
28. OK, then without the GOP onboard, there isn't a constitutional remedy no matter how many
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:00 PM
Jan 2018

Democrats "give a shit."

global1

(25,285 posts)
25. At Least All Dems Should Be in Front Of Microphones & .....
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:57 PM
Jan 2018

make the American People aware of the gravity of this situation and its consequences.

Everyday we lose a little more of our Democracy as we just sweep crap that Trump pulls under the rug.

What's next?

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
29. You mean like Schumer? And McCaskill? And Schiff?
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:02 PM
Jan 2018

And here on DU, every time one says or tweets or publishes, there are some who whine that "I want action, not words."

What's next is GET OUT THE VOTE, for any democrat, all democrats.

mcar

(42,403 posts)
43. I see Dems in front of mikes every day
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 05:45 PM
Jan 2018

I watch CNN from 5-7, sometimes switch to PBS. I also read newspapers, blogs and Twitter. Dems are all over the place.

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
42. Yeah, "not a lot Congress can do" is BS.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 05:44 PM
Jan 2018

"Not a lot they WILL do" - sure I get that. Not until after the Blue Tsunami.

kentuck

(111,110 posts)
4. But if it is done as a quid pro quo...
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:41 PM
Jan 2018

...in the furtherance of a crime, it would be illegal, in my opinion.

kentuck

(111,110 posts)
18. This is what the whole Russian investigation is about...
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:50 PM
Jan 2018

Flynn making calls to Russians about lifting the sanctions as soon as they are in office. Sanctions were put on because of the Russians interfering with our elections. Did Russia help Trump with the election? The release of the emails, etc... What did Trump receive from Russia? That is the quid pro quo for lifting the sanctions.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
21. From the article:
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:52 PM
Jan 2018
Congress could sue the president for allegedly breaking the law, but legal experts said courts tend to side with the executive branch on questions such as these. The sanctions law says Trump can avoid implementing them if he proves that Russia has made significant efforts to stop hacking into U.S. elections systems. It's not clear whether he's done that behind the scenes and the public just doesn't know about it.


And that depends on Mueller finding evidence of Quid Pro Quo from Trump himself.

That hasn't happened, and neither your opinion nor mine or anyone else's is relevant until then.

And I don't think that the Russian collusion will be easy to document or prove. Money laundering is another thing.
 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
22. Again, you think that the GOP is going to impeach? They are the majority.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:54 PM
Jan 2018

Do you have inside information that GOP congresscritters would vote to impeach?

Until then, there is no "impeach," until the majority of congress votes to do so.

Until there is impeach, there is no "indict."

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
9. You mean when we have a majority?
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:44 PM
Jan 2018


I think that would involve when the people "get around" to electing a majority of Dems, despite gerrymandering and voter suppression of Dems....

Orsino

(37,428 posts)
16. It will depend on how big the majority is...
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:49 PM
Jan 2018

...and on how willing the Dems are to be seen as the party who leaps at impeachment the instant they can.

I am resigned to hearing from one or more Dem leaders this year that impeachment is off the table, as they have done before. That may be a necessary fig leaf, and I certainly hope that Mueller's investigation won't be quashed, but impeachment is and will remain a last resort in a system of checks and balances that is otherwise demonstrably broken.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
26. You think Dem leaders won't work to make Trump accountable if they are the majority?
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:57 PM
Jan 2018

Why do you think that would be the case?

What were the charges that they could have impeached Bush on?

I mean, the GOP was talking about impeaching Obama for Benghazi, but in lieu of any evidence, it would have been ridiculous.

Orsino

(37,428 posts)
32. I recommended aginst holding one's breath.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:05 PM
Jan 2018

"Working to make Trump accountable" is exactly what I hope/expect, but that's by definition a slow process.

Blockbuster revelations from Mueller could speed the process, but once in the driver's seat, Dems will want to be seen to proceed deliberately, not kicking back but also not being hasty.

I've been saying for nearly three years that Trump will quit, and I can't believe that he's suddenly started having fun in his job. I think that long before impeachment can put on its shoes, the president will have resigned.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
33. "By definition a slow process."
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:10 PM
Jan 2018

So why would you expect anyone to hold one's breath, or it to go quickly?

I also don't think he's having "fun." I think that the strain is wearing on him.

And you are correct - he won't be seen as being fired, he will want to "quit" because that is more manly.

That's another reason that impeachment won't ever really reach the table. And I want Schneider to have the full NY state charges ready to go on his kids and him, so they can't be pardoned.



Orsino

(37,428 posts)
35. My revenge fantasies mostly key on criminal proceedings.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:14 PM
Jan 2018

The Trump crime family is really bad at crime, and state laws will find much more to work with.

But we probably gotta win seats before we can have any impeachment hearings.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
36. Oh, I have some revenge fantasies.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:22 PM
Jan 2018

But I don't think they'll come to pass.

However, Mueller taking the small fish first will make the medium fish want to deal, and hopefully with Schneider.

mcar

(42,403 posts)
44. Working to make Trump accountable
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 05:48 PM
Jan 2018

Has many facets, not only impeachment. Real investigations, holding up nominees, passing legislation to help people and forcing Dotard to sign or veto.

I'm looking forward to Ds doing all that when they take back Congress.

global1

(25,285 posts)
19. This Is Just Another Instance Where We Let Trump Off The Hook....
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:50 PM
Jan 2018

We let him get away with everything and there never are consequences.

In instances like this I always ask if the shoe where on the other foot what would the Repugs do? You know they wouldn't just let something like this go. They would be relentless.

I called both my Senators & my Congressman yesterday - all Dems.
I urged them all to speak out about this turning up his nose at Congress. Trump doesn't respect the law. This is a big deal in light of what we've learned about Trump & the Russians/Putin. It fits with the rest of the treasonous actions by this criminal. This can't be just swept under the rug like all the other crap Trump has pulled. Everytime we give this guy a pass he does something even worse.

What is wrong with this picture?

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
27. How have we "let Trump off the hook?" What was available to get him "on the hook?"
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:59 PM
Jan 2018

What consequences are there? If you know some that the expert in the article missed, please share them with us.

Did you even read the OP?

brer cat

(24,626 posts)
23. Some people need visuals.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 02:54 PM
Jan 2018

If there is finger wagging, arms flailing, and spittle flying it seems very authentic.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
31. Yes, that would be completely different.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 03:04 PM
Jan 2018

And even if congress did hold hearings, people would complain that they weren't angry enough, gruff enough, scoldy enough.

procon

(15,805 posts)
38. The norms are gone, folks. The mad Captain Queeg is at the helm
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 04:28 PM
Jan 2018

and sailing us into uncharted and perilous waters.

Johonny

(20,913 posts)
39. The Dems could run this year on this issue, and they will
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 04:45 PM
Jan 2018

Most of their likely voters think the president is compromised when it comes to Russia and this only adds fuel to a very hot fire.

Ligyron

(7,639 posts)
40. Let's all work our ass off to retake the House and then the Senate.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 04:56 PM
Jan 2018

I just hope the statute of limitations doesn't expire before we can put some of these criminals where they belong.

mcar

(42,403 posts)
41. Hasn't McConnell taken away Ds ability to place holds on judicial noms?
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 05:42 PM
Jan 2018

Thought I read that somewhere among all the other atrocities.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Even if Trump is blatantl...