1. The Constitution

In 2016 and 2017, the responsible conservative view regarding Donald Trump was, more or less:

That the power of the presidency was large, but limited.

That presidents always discovered that they were hemmed in on all sides by the machinery of the vast federal government.

That the guardrails of the Constitution and the bureaucracy were so sturdy that it would be, if not impossible, then very difficult, for any president to impose real, structural harm on the institution of the executive branch.

That the payoffs from a Republican president—Gorsuch!—were nearly certain and the costs were unlikely.

That at the end of the day, except for superficial aspects, such as his Twitter feed, Trump would be like most presidents—because it is the machinery of the government which forces presidents to color inside the lines, whatever their wishes.

Meanwhile, the more hysterical types (like me) argued that:

The machinery of government was less robust than it seemed.

The underlying norms of political life were at least as important as the written codes.

These norms could be easily shattered.

And while laws can be reformed, norms cannot be consciously rebuilt.

In essence, the debate between these two camps boiled down to one question:

Do you think the machinery of American political life—which is a contraption consisting of the Constitution, the vast federal government, the body of existing law, and our political norms—is sufficient to prevent a president from inflicting structural damage on the body politics?

If you answered “yes” to this question, then you could be relatively sanguine about President Trump. If you answered “no”—or even “maybe?”—then you were a hysteric who was exiled from the Republican party and read out of the conservative movement.

We do not yet have a definitive answer. But, to the country’s great misfortune, we keep accumulating data points.

And as of right now, it would not be unreasonable to reach a provisional conclusion: That the machinery of our constitutional republic is necessary, but not sufficient to protect the nation. Without elected representatives willing to put aside partisan loyalties, the machine is deeply vulnerable to corruption.

Podcast · September 25 2020 Bill Kristol on RBG and What is to Be Done On today's Bulwark Podcast, Bill Kristol joins Charlie Sykes to discuss the death of RBG, the 2020 elections, and what c...

2. Impeachment

Let’s stipulate something right here:

No one knows what really happened with Trump and Ukraine. Not yet. We have a fair idea of the outlines of the case—some from reporting, some from the president’s personal lawyer, some from Trump himself.

But until we get a thorough investigation and a full view of the transcript, all conclusions should be tentative and everyone should withhold final judgment.

That said, for the first time in Trump’s presidency, it’s clear that impeachment is a live issue.

There are lots of caveats. Maybe the investigation will prove that impeachment is not warranted. Maybe the investigation will make impeachment necessary. Maybe it will be somewhere in between.

But you can’t look at the situation as we know it and believe that impeachment is impossible.

Yet at the same time, we should not have any illusions about impeachment. Especially about how elected Republicans will conduct themselves.

In short: There can be no gun emitting enough smoke to force Republican senators to convict Trump.

Last week, we had members of Conservatism Inc. running around insisting that since the whistleblower may not have been in the room with Trump during the phone call that the entire story was “smoke and mirrors.”

Then it turned out that the story, as reported, seemed largely accurate.

Next we had Trump partisans insisting that he never brought up Biden.

Then Trump admitted he brought up Biden.

Now we have Trump supporters saying that the Biden request wasn’t linked to foreign aid.

It now seems as though they were mentioned in the same conversation.

The next goal-post will be set to say that there was no explicit linkage of money-for-Biden-dirt.

And if that condition is satisfied, the line will move to Whatever was said on the phone, you can’t prove that the release of foreign aid was tied to Biden dirt.

And if that gets satisfied, we’ll move on to No Biden dirt ever showed up, so whatever was said and whatever was done, nothing illegal happened.

And so on and so forth.

Point is: In order to force Republicans to turn on Trump, you’re going need a videotape of the president handing Volodymyr Zelensky a satchel full of cash and Zelensky then giving Trump a folder. And Trump then would have to say something like:

“Why yes, Volodymyr. This is the illegal information that I, Donald J. Trump, asked for you to obtain on my behalf for my purely personal gain that had nothing to do with the good of the country. And now I will take it to my secret lair. Thank you for colluding with me in order to influence the American election.”

And even if you had that tape, Trump would still get the support of 60 percent of registered Republican voters and hold on to 40 votes to acquit in the Senate.

So if impeachment is going to happen, Democrats should go into it with no illusions.