This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/18/us/politics/trump-ukraine-russian-impeachment.html
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Bash Putin? The Senate Is Willing. The Trick Is Not Impugning Trump. | |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| WASHINGTON — As the House of Representatives began debating Wednesday whether to impeach President Trump for undercutting Ukraine in its fight with Russian aggressors, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee met in a small room in the Capitol to consider a bill that has been bubbling along all year with bipartisan support: S. 482, the “Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act of 2019.” | WASHINGTON — As the House of Representatives began debating Wednesday whether to impeach President Trump for undercutting Ukraine in its fight with Russian aggressors, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee met in a small room in the Capitol to consider a bill that has been bubbling along all year with bipartisan support: S. 482, the “Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act of 2019.” |
| The bill’s lead author is Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who introduced it in February, long before he became the Senate’s leading defender of Mr. Trump, and long before Mr. Trump decided to undercut his own administration’s policy. | The bill’s lead author is Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who introduced it in February, long before he became the Senate’s leading defender of Mr. Trump, and long before Mr. Trump decided to undercut his own administration’s policy. |
| Today, the bill looks like it is preserved in legislative amber, an artifact from a different age — 10 months ago — when one of the few topics on which Republicans and Democrats agreed was that if the United States did not push back hard against President Vladimir V. Putin’s Russia, no one else would. | Today, the bill looks like it is preserved in legislative amber, an artifact from a different age — 10 months ago — when one of the few topics on which Republicans and Democrats agreed was that if the United States did not push back hard against President Vladimir V. Putin’s Russia, no one else would. |
| Now, that debate has mutated to match the politics of the moment. Republicans — Mr. Graham included — remain passionate about going after Russia. They just argue that the president’s shadow foreign policy to undercut that effort, in the service of his re-election campaign, doesn’t warrant impeachment. | Now, that debate has mutated to match the politics of the moment. Republicans — Mr. Graham included — remain passionate about going after Russia. They just argue that the president’s shadow foreign policy to undercut that effort, in the service of his re-election campaign, doesn’t warrant impeachment. |
| The debate that resonated inside the ornate Senate Foreign Relations Committee suite — where senators of a different era debated how to push back against Hitler in the 1930s and how to define Cold War strategy against the Soviet Union thereafter — featured Republicans who said they would vote for any bill that calls for punishing Moscow, or containing its power, even if they had differences over specific sanctions. | The debate that resonated inside the ornate Senate Foreign Relations Committee suite — where senators of a different era debated how to push back against Hitler in the 1930s and how to define Cold War strategy against the Soviet Union thereafter — featured Republicans who said they would vote for any bill that calls for punishing Moscow, or containing its power, even if they had differences over specific sanctions. |
| The trick for them is to bash Mr. Putin without impugning Mr. Trump. | The trick for them is to bash Mr. Putin without impugning Mr. Trump. |
| “This was something everyone was for, until they weren’t,’’ Senator Angus King, independent of Maine, said this week. He mused on how the country came to this moment because of the president’s decision to trade an issue of huge geopolitical gravity — Ukraine’s security, and thus the United States’ — for a “domestic political errand,’’ as Mr. Trump’s own former top Russia adviser, Fiona Hill, put it so searingly in testimony last month. | “This was something everyone was for, until they weren’t,’’ Senator Angus King, independent of Maine, said this week. He mused on how the country came to this moment because of the president’s decision to trade an issue of huge geopolitical gravity — Ukraine’s security, and thus the United States’ — for a “domestic political errand,’’ as Mr. Trump’s own former top Russia adviser, Fiona Hill, put it so searingly in testimony last month. |
| But that is only the beginning of the contradictions in American foreign policy unearthed in the impeachment inquiry. | But that is only the beginning of the contradictions in American foreign policy unearthed in the impeachment inquiry. |
| At Wednesday morning’s Senate hearing, Democrats and Republicans outdid each other in professing their devotion to standing up to Mr. Putin. Mr. Graham termed Russia an “evil enemy” comparable to fighting “the Nazis and the Japanese” in World War II — a bit of exaggeration about the current level of conflict, perhaps, but symbolic of the mood on Capitol Hill. | At Wednesday morning’s Senate hearing, Democrats and Republicans outdid each other in professing their devotion to standing up to Mr. Putin. Mr. Graham termed Russia an “evil enemy” comparable to fighting “the Nazis and the Japanese” in World War II — a bit of exaggeration about the current level of conflict, perhaps, but symbolic of the mood on Capitol Hill. |
| “The president is not a Russian agent,’’ Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, declared, in the first and last mention of Mr. Trump during the hearing. He went on to say that while he had doubts about some parts of the legislation, he would vote for it, because he had to fight “information warfare,’’ and that Republicans had to remember “Vladimir Putin will do to us what he has done to everyone else.” | “The president is not a Russian agent,’’ Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, declared, in the first and last mention of Mr. Trump during the hearing. He went on to say that while he had doubts about some parts of the legislation, he would vote for it, because he had to fight “information warfare,’’ and that Republicans had to remember “Vladimir Putin will do to us what he has done to everyone else.” |
| After some arguments about whether the new sanctions might harm American companies — the chief concern of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and petroleum industry lobbyists, who argued for watering it down — the bill passed, 17 to 5. A vote in the full Senate would not come until next year, presumably after an impeachment trial. | After some arguments about whether the new sanctions might harm American companies — the chief concern of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and petroleum industry lobbyists, who argued for watering it down — the bill passed, 17 to 5. A vote in the full Senate would not come until next year, presumably after an impeachment trial. |
| But the juxtaposition of the unified denunciation of Russia and the divisions over how to deal with a president who was undercutting the pushback against Moscow was striking. | But the juxtaposition of the unified denunciation of Russia and the divisions over how to deal with a president who was undercutting the pushback against Moscow was striking. |
| In the end, this impeachment is the first over a question of whether the president is selling out American national security. While Ukraine is the proximate event, how the president has dealt with Mr. Putin is the overarching theme. | In the end, this impeachment is the first over a question of whether the president is selling out American national security. While Ukraine is the proximate event, how the president has dealt with Mr. Putin is the overarching theme. |
| One of Mr. Trump’s top advisers argued the other day that the first article of impeachment was flawed because Mr. Trump was not guilty of withholding “vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression.’’ Citing a major pillar of the Republicans’ defense of Mr. Trump, this adviser noted that the $391 million in military aid eventually was released, and the Ukrainian military now has Javelin anti-tank missiles to take on Russia’s ground forces. He argued that Mr. Trump has done more to support the Ukrainian government than President Barack Obama ever did. | One of Mr. Trump’s top advisers argued the other day that the first article of impeachment was flawed because Mr. Trump was not guilty of withholding “vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression.’’ Citing a major pillar of the Republicans’ defense of Mr. Trump, this adviser noted that the $391 million in military aid eventually was released, and the Ukrainian military now has Javelin anti-tank missiles to take on Russia’s ground forces. He argued that Mr. Trump has done more to support the Ukrainian government than President Barack Obama ever did. |
| That ignores the reality that one lesson of the impeachment process is that American allies are on notice that the United States’ protection is up for sale. | That ignores the reality that one lesson of the impeachment process is that American allies are on notice that the United States’ protection is up for sale. |
| And that the price includes helping a president get re-elected. | And that the price includes helping a president get re-elected. |