Let's talk about the end of the Special Master....

Answering Beau's question:

Trump's Hail Mary pass was to get his Ukraine files walled off from his prosecution for the impeachment and insurrection. Trump likely did not let him make that argument directly and it will be hard for Smith to unsee this evidence. Trump would not have won because, under Hamdi, his executive power was constrained by congressional action. See http://xianleft.blogspot.com/2022/12/what-trump-was-hiding.html

Now that this question is over, Trump is laying low, probably on the advice of his attorneys (who are likely working a deal for him). He may also be under house arrest as of this writing.

The issue of Ukraine is more important than the documents. No Senator who wants to be president wants to criminalize foreign policy. See http://xianleft.blogspot.com/2020/07/regarding-trump-and-stone.html The relevant paragraphs:

Allowing Russia a zone of influence near its borders (a Monroe Doctrine, if you will) is not an idea originating with Trump. Is his presidential discretion wide enough to pursue such a policy, regardless of past doctrine?  This is another way of asking whether we wish to criminalize American foreign policy?

We tried in Iran-Contra, however the investigation led to the overturn of Lt. Col. North's criminal conviction. The question remains, was violating the Boland Amendment a crime or a secret foreign policy?

The Ukraine affair is of a similar nature - although the system worked well enough to make sure the military aid was spent. The purported crime was election interference, but that interference would have, at worst, been one day event on Fox News. It amounts to a dirty trick, and a sloppy one at that.

The real issue with Urkaine is whether election interference was just the cover story, with Trump's real intention being to hang Ukraine out to dry and force a pro-Moscow settlement. Would doing so have been a crime or an act of presidential discretion. While the impeachment trial hinted at treasonous intent, it was not pursued convincingly enough for Republicans to have to vote to remove.

Some may even conclude that Senator Schumer and Chairman Schiff took a dive, that the entire impeachment was, essentially, an electoral stunt all its own - one that far exceeds the 15 minutes of fame on Fox News had the Ukrainian President been more cooperative.

President Bush took a pass at arresting Vice President Cheney when he attempted to force his own policy on torture on the Justice Department - who objected and went to the President. There is also the matter of war crimes ordered by Cheney and Rumsfeld. The Geneva Convention was not observed at Gitmo. The war may or may not have been about WMD. Regardless, Rummy lost the peace by firing all Baath party officers from the Iraqi Army, thus destroying the existing civil society in Iraq. When the Baathists fled to Syria, they just may have taken the WMD with them. That chemical weapons were used in Syria should be no surprise to anyone who can connect the dots.

The 2006 election was about a few things, but the failure of the peace, as detailed by Bob  Woodward in a book that came out just before the election, had a big part in the loss (as did GOP corruption). There was a real push to hold the President (or the Vice President), responsible for the debacle, but Speaker Pelosi would not go there. Doing so would have criminalized foreign policy.

Where do we draw the line once we open Pandora's Box? Iran-Contra was played as a rogue operation by the National Security Advisor and his Deputy. By that time, Reagan's dementia was likely far enough advanced that he had no involvement - and no one asked whether Vice President Bush was in the loop. This has always vexed me. History may provide an answer when we are all dead or we may never know.

We currently have a similarly demented President, although he seems to be active when he thinks it is in his interest. His niece paints a picture in her book of a learning disabled sociopath. The real constitutional crisis is that the Executive Branch is operating without the active participation of the elected President. What role is Vice President Pence playing in the operation of the government? He should at least be held to account for not invoking the 25th Amendment when Robert Mueller was appointed. What did he know and when did he know it on Russia? Was the cover story of Flynn being fired for lying to Pence itself a cover story? Did anyone ask?

This is important because Cy Vance (as well as the D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine) are now empowered to investigate Citizen Trump. Does Trump v. Vance imply the end to the OLC Memo? How can it not if the President is not above the law? If A.G. Barr is really the bright shiny object distracting Trump while SDNY and DC do their work, is it time for them to now go forward, indict and arrest Trump (before Vance and Racine can beat them to it)?

If we are lucky as a nation, Leader McConnell will realize that he and his band of rats need to jump off the U.S.S. Trump, thus forcing him to resign or to have Pence bench Trump and become both Acting President and the nominee. In this case, Vice President Biden needs to shift his attentions from the incompetence and criminality of Trump to the lack of moral courage and mixed motives of Pence. Regardless, we must still address the issue of the criminality of the White House foreign policy.

Schiff should have followed the money trail, which in the Parnas and Fruman case has shown starts in Moscow, likely leads to Rudi and is alleged to fund the Trump Super PAC (thus benefiting much of the Senate impeachment jury). Let us hope this is not being saved as an October surprise. If McConnell moves Trump out of the way, it won't be of much use in going after Pence, who seems to have been mostly above the fray.

If McConnell fails to act, investigations must go on, which brings us back to Pandora and her box. How shall any Putin-Trump connection be played? Is it corruption or discretion. So far, only the corruption angle has been advanced. This has not worked with the GOP Senate or the electorate. If Trump is a traitor, it should be examined, but this will have implications for future presidents, including a President Schiff.

The question of whether Bin Laden was assassinated rather than being captured has criminal implications. Others have raised the question of the targeting of an American citizen who was part of Al Queda in the Arab Peninsula. Most come down on the side of presidential discretion. If we criminalize foreign policy, could it boomerang on our best president since Ike?

In my opinion, we need to open the box. Corruption is non-starter. It will not convince anyone in the Trump orbit that he did anything wrong. Unless Trump is pursued as a traitor - which I argue that he is - and the point is proven by a future DeutcheBank data dump on the Intelligence Committee - the nation will take a long time to heal. Not all Republican Trump supporters are his "fine people" who defend the Lost Cause. Continuing with Trump's criminality must lead to a knockout blow or it will be perceived as yet more partisanship, even if this means walking on the slippery slope.