Quick Takes on the News: It’s Impeachment Season

Add to Briefcase
July 12, 2017, 8 p.m.

Sherman is first. But what's that worth?

It fi­nally happened. Demo­crat­ic Rep. Brad Sher­man of Cali­for­nia on Wed­nes­day filed the first art­icle of im­peach­ment against Pres­id­ent Trump. And no, it prob­ably won’t go any­where. But the first res­ol­u­tions call­ing for the im­peach­ment of Richard Nix­on and Bill Clin­ton didn’t yield res­ults either. In fact, they fo­cused on en­tirely dif­fer­ent al­leged wrong­do­ings.

In Ju­ly 1973, Rep. Robert Drin­an, a Demo­crat from Mas­sachu­setts, called for Nix­on’s im­peach­ment—not for Wa­ter­gate, but for is­sues sur­round­ing the war in Vi­et­nam. While Drin­an was lonely, draw­ing no co­spon­sors, le­gions of Demo­crat­ic mem­bers soon in­tro­duced their own res­ol­u­tions per­tain­ing to the Wa­ter­gate rev­el­a­tions. Nix­on resigned be­fore the vote could take place.

In the 105th Con­gress, Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Bob Barr of Geor­gia filed the first call for Clin­ton’s re­mov­al at the end of 1997—weeks be­fore the Mon­ica Lew­in­sky scan­dal broke. He cited more gen­er­al evid­ence that Clin­ton “has en­gaged in a sys­tem­ic ef­fort to ob­struct, un­der­mine, and com­prom­ise the le­git­im­ate and prop­er func­tions and pro­cesses of the ex­ec­ut­ive branch.” Thirty-one mem­bers agreed enough to co­spon­sor. Barr would later serve as an im­peach­ment man­ager in Clin­ton’s Sen­ate tri­al—prob­ably something that Sher­man shouldn’t plan on in a Re­pub­lic­an Con­gress.
—Mar­en McInnes

House Financial Services Committee member Brad Sherman gestures as he questions Federal Reserve Board Chair Janet Yellen during the committee's hearing on Sept. 28, 2016. AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

For Kasowitz, Trump a blessing and a curse

Rep­res­ent­ing the pres­id­ent is un­doubtedly a badge of hon­or. But as Pres­id­ent Trump’s at­tor­ney Marc Kasow­itz is learn­ing, it can also be an al­batross. Giv­en his new no­tori­ety, ProP­ub­lica did some re­port­ing on Kasow­itz, learn­ing that his on­go­ing drink­ing may hinder his abil­ity to get a se­cur­ity clear­ance.

And now, his firm’s op­pon­ents in court are bring­ing up Kasow­itz’s most fam­ous cli­ent. As first flagged by The Na­tion­al Law Journ­al, a South Flor­ida busi­ness formerly rep­res­en­ted by Kasow­itz Ben­son Torres is su­ing the firm for mal­prac­tice, fraud, and mis­con­duct.

The com­plaint refers to Kasow­itz Ben­son Torres as a “head­line-grabbing New York–based law firm” that didn’t de­liv­er “leg­al ser­vices com­men­sur­ate with a law firm that rep­res­ents the Pres­id­ent of the United States.”

Later, the plaintiffs refer to Kasow­itz, who “has re­ceived re­cent no­tori­ety as the lead­er of Pres­id­ent Don­ald Trump’s out­side leg­al team. Based on the bio­graph­ic­al in­form­a­tion for Mr. Kasow­itz on the firm’s web­site, any pro­spect­ive cli­ent would ex­pect to get the type of top-flight rep­res­ent­a­tion that one would ex­pect from the Pres­id­ent’s law firm.”

The com­plaint also notes that part­ners in Kasow­itz’s firm bill up to $1,250 per hour.
—Jeff Dufour

Marc Kasowitz, personal attorney of President Trump, makes a statement at the National Press Club, following the congressional testimony of former FBI Director James Comey, on June 8. AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.