1/ Of course the substance of the grotesque breach of constitutional duty Taylor describes is of the upmost importance. But don't lose sight of three other things: First, as Taylor pleads at the end, don't forget about the devastating impact ...
@just_security
@just_security
2/ ... on our relationship w/Ukraine & our decades-long efforts to stop Russian aggression. Second, recall that only two weeks ago WH Counsel Cipollone wrote to Congress that its investigation was illegitimate & unlawful and that therefore ...
3/ ... the Administration "could not participate" at all in the Ukraine inquiry. And reportedly the State Department issued a directive prohibiting officials from testifying. Yet Taylor, Sondland & several others *are* testifying. This is *virtually unheard of*:
4/ officials disregarding a direct order that they must not become involved in an (allegedly) unconstitutional congressional investigation. And doing so despite no realistic prospect of contempt sanctions (b/c DOJ wouldn't prosecute them). Which tells you something ...
5/ ... about just how radical & absurd & groundless the Cipollone arguments were--so far beyond the pale that numerous officials are ignoring the letter and directive w/impunity. A horrible abuse by Cipollone of the Office of WHC. [cont.]
6/ Third, far as we can tell from what's public thus far, neither the WHC, nor NSC, nor Pompeo, nor Barr, lifted a finger to stop Trump from engaging in a patently unconstitutional and devastatingly damaging course of conduct when it was reported to them. [cont.]
7/ They all should have threatened to resign if Trump didn't cease the unlawful conduct right away. Cf. The Ashcroft Hospital Incident. Instead, Cipollone continues to insist it was "entirely appropriate." As @benjaminwittes and I have written, ...
8/ ... such an effort to *normalize and defend* this conduct might be more damaging to the constitutional order than the conduct itself.
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
