The New York Times editorial board suggested Saturday that Congress needs to impeach President Donald Trump.
“In the end, the story told by the two articles of impeachment approved on Friday morning by the House Judiciary Committee is short, simple and damning,” The Times wrote.
US President Donald Trump (C), First Lady Melania Trump (R) and their son Barron Trump (L) return to the White House after two weeks spent at Trump’s golf club in New Jersey on August 18, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Eric BARADAT / AFP via Getty Images)
“President Donald Trump abused the power of his office by strong-arming Ukraine, a vulnerable ally, holding up hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid until it agreed to help him influence the 2020 election by digging up dirt on a political rival,” the board argued in what is a recapitulation of what House Democrats have been saying since start of the impeachment inquiry drama. (RELATED: These Newspaper Editorial Boards Are Formally Endorsing Impeachment)
The Times suggested the president was “caught in the act” and then proceeded to show “unprecedented, categorical and indiscriminate defiance” even after being issued multiple subpoenas. Because Trump “made it impossible for Congress to carry out fully its constitutionally mandated oversight role,” the editors accuse the president of trespassing “the separation of powers, a safeguard of the American republic.”
The Times noted that impeachment will move to the full House of Representatives on Wednesday. (RELATED: Trump Says Republicans Could Get Impeachment Payment On Next Democratic President)
The Times further contended that Trump has been “stonewalling as no previous president has” and if he were really innocent he would have released any documents House Democrats asked for and would have allowed any administration official to appear before the Houser Intelligence Committee.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Although the editors conceded that “it’s regrettable that the House moved as fast as it did, without working further through the courts and through other means to hear from numerous crucial witnesses,” they agree with House Democrats “when they say they can’t afford to wait.”