Trump Impeachment: Largely Inarguable Argument Against Donald Trump

With about three months remaining before our election, we are entering the period where any further significant policy decisions or declarations of intention are the by-products of polling adjustments and final course corrections. Fortunately -- and unlike when we were last presented with a choice -- we also have almost four years of actual governance to evaluate now, and the evidence has provided a clear referendum on the President.

The argument against Donald Trump leads me to a specific conclusion, one that is something less than a close call. Given the opportunity to lead the nation in both good times and bad, Donald Trump has failed on virtually every level other than two: his electing judges at the federal level and for the Supreme Court in keeping with his prescribed ideologies and his evisceration of federal regulations regarding business practices. In each of those areas, his actions have followed his promised path; agreement or disagreement with the choices is largely a matter of preference rather than competency, although I would argue (and do later) that there are some significant issues there as well.

In terms of domestic policies, foreign affairs, economic responses, leadership and advancing the nation forward, there is an almost complete failure by any arbitrary measures.

This is an analysis of those five areas and my convictions regarding his performance in each. The values expressed areas they must be for each of us entering a voting booth -- both personal and consistent with values that I hold; my purpose in sharing is to make my analysis available to anyone for their own consideration. Like most of the country, I find that time has hardened my opinions rather than confused them; regardless of any other judgement of the President, one has to admit to his almost predictability in terms of responses and behaviours.

Domestic Policy Issues under the Trump Administration

There are usually any number of aspects to consider in domestic policy, from the advancement of signature initiatives to the efficacy of his responses to events and opportunities. My own priority of economic impacts is such that I separate those into their own category; this analysis is based on all other domestic issues.

At this moment, it is impossible to define any transformative or important domestic policies that carry Trump’s signature.

The preeminent domestic policies during his first term have been, and remain, the President’s response to the arrival of the pandemic. In meaningful ways, the administration’s efforts in this regard comfortably impact all five of the areas considered; I will attempt to limit my analysis to those aspects that I consider relevant as I process each.

Regarding domestic policies and the impacts of the virus, there is little to report. It has been the conscious decision of the administration to specifically refuse to create or employ any meaningful federal policies, more usually either pushing responsibilities to the states or to directly diminishing the effectiveness and efforts of his own agencies such as the CDC or FEMA. The sole initiative that can be traced to executive action is the massive funding and support for a medical science response, whether by the vaccine or therapeutic; that program initiated months too late, and while there have been some encouraging signs, those have come largely from the private sector, and in large part from European sources.

Domestic Affairs and Policies

The abject failure of the administration to contain the damage of the pandemic is unequivocal; by every quantifiable measure, despite given the reigns of the nation with the most resources and technological capabilities on earth, America has suffered arguably the greatest negative impact. By every measure, from deaths and hospitalizations to the decimation of the economy and the education process to public disaffection and conflict, no major country other than perhaps Brazil has approached the ineptitude. Six months in, the nation continues to flounder without any evidence of actively controlling the course or mitigating its continuing damage, instead simply rolling with the devastating punches until it either run its course or is interrupted by medicine.

Any arguments for the success of this administration regarding this issue are by definition specious and insincere.

His efforts in the health care area have been primarily to remove the existing ACA program, the hasty eradication of which was a primary campaign promise. It remains the law of the land, and despite frequent promises, the administration has never provided an alternative for public consideration. As a result, the public acceptance of the ACA is considerably higher than it was after its inception; that popularity has forced his administration to adopt and promote several of its key aspects, most notably its novel coverage for pre-existing illnesses and support for extended coverage for children to older ages. Largely rebuffed by the courts, the actions and efforts of the administration have instead left the ACA maimed and bleeding but alive, a worst of all worlds where it has generated millions of uninsured without any constructive alternative or response. Four years after promising the act’s removal and replacement with a superior option, neither has occurred nor is even considered a priority any more.

Environmental Issues

The administration’s efforts concerning environmental issues are substantial; that is not to say positive or constructive. The administration has systematically stripped away existing regulations and alliances designed to respond to existing and expanding concerns and has diminished the EPA to a point of irrelevancy. Couched within a pro-business posture, America has regressed by decades in caring for the water, soil and air that are crucial to our continuing success as a country. The denial of the established science regarding the measurable realities of our planet has placed us as a pariah in global consideration and has deprived the country a critical seat at the decision-making table. The significant economic opportunities missed as a result are for later discussion.

The administration’s enmity towards immigration, both legal and illegal, has been constant while specifically ineffective, given their stated objective. The signature promise of a wall along the southern border has seen only marginal progress despite the allocation of billions of dollars; construction has been plagued by structural failures and disputes over land access. The promise of forcing Mexico to fund its construction has become a punchline due to its complete repudiation. Illegal crossings declined significantly during the Obama administration, but have stabilized or slightly increased during the Trump administration. Deportations also were far greater during the prior administration despite significant increases in budgeting for the agencies involved. Most notably, harsh and likely illegal treatment of families and children at the border have subjected the country to domestic and international condemnation, and deservedly so.

My personal opinions on the matter of health care, the environment and immigration run counter to those of the President, so each of these areas are disqualifying for me without consideration of the incompetence in execution of the administration's goals. I note the failures of those policies to point to the fact that even where the President is clear on his objectives, he is unable to achieve his goals. It is worth noting that even his success in filling out the federal judiciary has been marred not by the ideological bent of the candidates, but by their demonstrated incompetency and inappropriateness; witnessing the procession of nominees who have been declared unfit for the positions by the American Bar Association is a poignant reminder of the man who suggested them to the Senate.

Foreign Policy and National Security

Other than economics, there are four areas of foreign affairs that concern me most: our response to events, our approach to our adversaries, our relationship with our allies and our global standing.

Other than the pandemic, the administration has been fortunate to have relatively few significant events globally, and the ones that have occurred -- Syria, Iran, specific provocations in China, North Korea and Afghanistan -- have been limited in scope. There have been a few concerns -- the decision to withdraw from the support of the Kurds, and the abdication of pressure in Syria to Russia, the reluctance to engage China in terms of their human rights issues -- but they pale in contrast to domestic and economic concerns, which was the intention of the administration’s isolationist preferences.

It is in our approach to our adversaries that the gravest concerns are present, and in none of the major theatres has America made progress. Rather, there is a demonstrable regression in each of the four primary adversarial relationships: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. On a tier slightly below those, our miscalculations and failings in the Middle East suggest that those areas are equally negative.

The relationship with China, our primary global competitor economically and growing influence in areas that we care about, is at a particularly tenuous point. The closing of significant embassies may not appear to be critical, but historically that is clear evidence of disrupted (or worse) chains of communication and a sign of elevated tensions. We have an open dispute with China relating to several issues, from the Coronavirus to specific corporations and trade issues, and are currently still engaged in a trade war, one which has not benefited America. Trump consistently miscasts the expenses associated with tariffs as a form of national income; of course, that is untrue as tariffs are paid by the country receiving the products, not sending them. As a result, the trade deficit with China -- a specific objective of the administration -- has risen in each of the two years before 2020; the impact of the pandemic will make the current year totals fairly random.

Foreign Affairs

To the degree that we are seeking to mute China’s advancing influence in world affairs, the last three years have represented a sharp decline in our capacity to do so. Our withdrawal from international agreements in trade, environmental concerns and military practices have provided unfortunate opportunities for China to expand its economic, military and political influence with allies and adversaries alike, and has tangibly reduced our ability to advance our own interests. Regardless of the belief in the efficacy of those agreements, the inability to replace them with something superior has created that vacuum that China has happily exploited.

The outcome of our reduced footprint has included increased adventurism by China in its surrounding areas, opening potential challenges to our relationships with Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

Relationship with Russia

The relationship with Russia is equally concerning and negative to American interests. Russian influence in the Middle East, Eastern Europe and important areas such as the Philippines and Turkey has grown substantially in a particularly short period of time; imbalances that might usually take a decade or more to evolve have occurred virtually overnight, raising legitimate concerns about our ability to restrain expansionist inclinations militarily or politically.

Russia has used the internal issues of America, as well as our weakened geopolitical standing, for internal propaganda and political benefits; one result has been Putin’s consolidation of power both presently and in the future. Lack of response or active deterrence to their international interference and agitation in the politics of America and our allies has given their apparatus a sheen of impunity. Our administration’s often confounding deference to Russia has created visible fissures within our own intelligence community and diplomatic corps, and a difficult calculus for our allies to comprehend or react to. In no sense has America’s relationship with Russia and its leaders advanced the interests of the nation.

Nuclear Ambitions of Iran and North Korea

As the Trump administration entered into power, it stated clearly that the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea were primary points of focus. Specific statements of denial for each country’s proliferation were accompanied by promises of a quick turnaround, and in keeping with those expectations, Trump withdrew from the Iran disarmament agreement and established unprecedented engagements with the North Korean leadership. Both of those initiatives were met with dismay by virtually all of our global allies, as well as concerns from our standing professionals in the area, but the administration moved resolutely in its chosen direction.

As the first term expires, both countries are presently somewhat unchecked in their path towards nuclear arms. Our European allies attempted to stem Iran’s progress without our cooperation with limited success; Iran currently has stated its intention to expand its capabilities without a tangible response from the U.S., although there is a possibility that recent actions taken against that program may have been in part supported through a third party, likely Israel.

North Korea, having extracted specific concessions from the Trump administration without reciprocation, has resumed most of its efforts and is tangibly ahead of where it was when those negotiations began. The only significant outcome of the administration's policies has been the provision of status for Kim Jung-un through our engagement that has been a stated objective for generations of leadership there, and an opportunity for their progression without penalty.

Involvement in the Middle East

Our involvement in the Middle East has been erratic and weak, with substantial regression in the situation in Syria (where we have accepted the Assad regime’s control and atrocities) and in the Israeli - Palestinian situation, where our bungled efforts to suggest an outcome have resulted in Israeli expansion that may have precluded future administrations from even seeking a two-state solution, without presenting a possible alternative.

The administration came into power asserting a retreat from global influence and involvement and has achieved those objectives. Unfortunately, the path is chosen and executed resulted in a specific and dangerous national weakness, one that is being exploited by more competent actors who lack our national interest. The world is tangibly more dangerous and adversarial today, with no apparent positives to offset the losses.

Trump’s Engagement with Global Threats

In contrast to Trump’s passive engagement with global threats, his treatment of our allies and the resultant loss of influence in their policies has been aggressively negative. Historical alliances are frayed beyond recognition, resulting in specific opportunities for incursion by adversarial governments. Our continued animosity towards international cooperation has had impacts in our trade and political opportunities and has deprived us of the collective power that our previous leadership had provided us.

Ultimately, an isolationist policy in a globally integrated world is of questionable value when well executed and skillfully delineated; poorly advanced, it creates negatives without accordant positives. Such is where America finds itself today -- reduced in stature and influence, diminished in security and power, and benefitting nothing. We are a painfully smaller country than we were just a few years ago, with our standing in the global community compromised, and our capacity to conform to world events to our preference and best interests degraded. The path back to that previous position is now unclear, having permitted adversarial interests to expand and collegial ones to lapse.

Trump administration on economic affairs and government regulations

There is little to discuss here, other than the obvious: the policies and decisions of this administration have resulted in the worst economic disaster since at least the Great Recession, and likely since the Great Depression. Factually, there is evidence that the damage done is unprecedented, specifically in terms of the decline in the GDP, and in the dramatic rise in national debt.

The knee jerk reaction is to state that the proximate cause of the economic catastrophe is the pandemic, and obviously that was the event that triggered the downturn, but we first have to acknowledge the failure of policies before the “good times” ended. Despite the construct driven by administration pronouncements, the economy prior to the virus was a direct byproduct of the artificial stimulus rather than expanded production, and the results gained by gaming the system were unimpressive at best, and problematic at worst.

Economic Responses

The big bang following the election was a massive tax cut, one that predominantly supported corporate interests and high wealth individuals. The objective for any policy such as that is fairly limited: that such largesse will provide such a substantial stimulus to the economy that the increase in revenues from growth will offset the lower receipts from the taxpaying public. In every event, it is assumed to be accompanied by reductions in government expenses, and a movement of functionality from the private to the public sector. Unfortunately, there was no such dividend from the tax cut, as general economic measures continued essentially on their prior trajectory, and deficits expanded to record levels relating to a period of growth.

Unemployment continued to improve as it had for the prior eight years, essentially indistinguishable from its previous trend. Similarly, the stock markets -- a questionable evaluation tool for national economic progress -- rose at percentages familiar to their prior periods. Remarkably, after exchanging every environmental control for pro-business policies; following the tax cuts handing hundreds of billions to corporate interests; with the opening of lands and markets for exploration and participation; the Trump administration was unable to move the needle past where it had already been moving for the seven or eight years prior in any meaningful way.

Then came the challenge of the pandemic, and the collapse of the economy.

Most Dangerous Effects to Economy

The reaction to the introduction of the parameters of dealing with the pandemic has been erratic, contradictory, thoughtless and chronically late. The lack of a coherent response and federal leadership caused the most dangerous effects to any economy: unpredictability and inconsistency. A strong economy can overcome bad policies as long as it has a clear vision of what to compensate for, but the administration’s halting, uneven pronouncements and attempts at encouragement were the textbook recipe for economic sabotage.

As the epic collapse began, the administration panicked further, attempting to salvage what it could not provide strategically with infinite funding. The final tally for the incompetent response will include a national debt that may not be serviceable, and a distortion of the markets that may be unrecoverable. Among the highlights covered previously is the breaking down of the walls between fiscal and monetary policy; the moral hazard of Treasury pronouncements that the deficits are irrelevant so long as the Federal Reserve manipulates interest rates to zero; the statement by the Fed chairman Powell that there are literally no limits to how many dollars he can provide by virtue of physical and digital presses; the congressional largesse that has been provided through hastily thrown together initiatives notable for their inefficiencies; and the creation of a marketplace and market that is highly dependent on continuing subsidies.

The stock market has been inflated by the provision of free capital in the trillions, keeping its appearance while dislodging it from any connection to the actual economy. Unemployment has reached levels unseen since the ’30s, while the national debt is likely to increase by over $10 trillion dollars, a number that is as difficult to imagine as it is to recover from. Despite our active manipulation, the ongoing decline of the dollar against other currencies is a direct result of the international awareness of our profligate spending, and there is little to suggest that the economic challenges will resolve in the coming months.

The gross malpractice of this administration in the areas of economic stewardship will resonate for generations, and the impact on American progress and stability will require sacrifices and missed opportunities for just as long. Precedents set in the past year suggest a future of irresponsibility and rationalization, with unknown repercussions from the violations of norms that have existed for well over a century. Any economic crises in the coming years will find that there is nothing left for a response, exposing America to the vagaries of an uncertain world without shield or armour.

It is not an overstatement to point to the transgressions of this administration as the potential inception of a diminished America, one whose recovery will require generations of forced austerity and social decisions that run afoul of foundational beliefs. Avoidance of that outcome will require skills and disciplines already proven abjectly absence from this administration.

Leadership

Within classic definitions of leadership are a broad collection of generalizations, the bottom line in most of the valid ones is this: in a time of challenge and crisis, does the leader create a unified response behind the best option forward? There is little to discuss here; President Trump has failed every possible test or definition of a leader, and in his divisiveness, the abdication of responsibility, conflicting pronouncements, petty arguments and general rejection of collaborative governance he has demonstrably abandoned the country that he was elected to lead. Despite his obvious interest in consolidating his authority, Trump has been a failed leader and shows a degenerating ability to address or recover from that failure.

His inability to place confirmed parties in critical positions despite an obsequious Senate has been coupled with his stated desire to keep those professional offices held by sycophants who merely echo his pronouncements; his description of the Attorney General and the Justice Department as being prioritized to support his whims, rather than to enforce the dictates of the Constitution, in unprecedented and, having found a co-conspirator in Barr, impossibly dangerous to the rule of law. His demonstrated disrespect for military leadership, and their critical responses to close exposure to his presidency, along with his inclination to see the military professionals as a personal service to his whims, has created a distancing between the civilian and military leaderships that threatens effectiveness should there be a real need for engagement.

The national unrest in areas of racial injustice and local authority are instructive as to the lack of skills in leadership. The flashpoint - a brutal killing of an unarmed black man by a police officer in broad daylight -- was consistent with recent tragedies relating to racial predation, and in an environment where minorities were deeply and disproportionately impacted by the pandemic and attendant economic collapse, entirely predictable. Unable to respond to the moment constructively, Trump retreated to promoting division and inflaming the circumstances over a period of months, exacerbating tensions and dividing his country. His actions have compromised the military to the point where they have spoken out in contravention to their usual behaviour; they have spawned controversy and national passions in ways and over arguments that weren’t present at the inception. In every way, his failure of leadership was evident throughout and remains a force for national trauma.

Democratic Government

Trump’s attempts at forging an autocratic position out of a democratic government would have been far more dangerous and worthy of revolution had he not been so incompetent at doing so. Trump has used tools designed for exceptional circumstances as primary tools of solitary governance, executing a record number of executive orders and resorting to constant court filings for issues that would conventionally be the product of compromise. In spite of having processed a record number of justices at the federal level, and two Supreme Court Justices, his administration’s record in those court appearances is particularly bad, an indication of how far he’s sought to push convention.

Trump has operated his administration as a bad CEO of a failing company, besieged by constant and historic turnover and rejection of qualified applicants to participate in his offices. As the third President to be impeached, his relationship with the other governing party has been astonishingly void of effort or civility; he presides over the most leaderless America in over a century, and potentially since our founding.

Advancing the Nation Forward

Over forty years ago, Ronald Reagan asked America if it believed that it was better off than it was four years prior. The answer was resounding no, resulting in his becoming the 40th President of the United States.

The same question, asked today, would be responded to with some laughter. The nation is embroiled in an epidemic that is, by several measures, still expanding some six months after its arrival. The economy has collapsed, with historic levels of unemployment and business failures. The institutions of the nation are under attack or compromised, from education to law enforcement, from media to all organs of government. A protracted protest against racial inequality and systemic racism has expanded from across the country to across the world and continues against a backdrop of an adversarial and deliberately provocative president.

America’s global standing, from political to the military to economic to scientific, has cratered in ways unimaginable a few years ago. We are a nation in disarray, divided and exhausted, unprepared for the present and unsure of the future.

In light of these realities, it is somewhat astonishing that the President who has presided over the devolution of the country in four short years is asking for another four years. For his scandal-ridden administration, there is not even the suggestion of an agenda for resolving the crises, for restoring America’s solvency and well being, let alone its national pride… there is merely the request for continued authority for the sake of that position alone.

There is nothing meaningful to debate, nothing of substance to balance the case. It is quite simply past time for Donald Trump to go, and to leave the country that he has so badly wounded alone to heal itself.

It is the adding of insult to injury to even consider any alternative to that outcome in November.