Blumenthal willing to speak on impeachment

WASHINGTON — Republican senators have found a novel way to duck reporters’ questions on what they think of the impeachment process unfolding on the House side. If the House does ultimately vote to impeach — Thursday’s vote was to start the process in the open — a trial will take place in the Senate with Chief Justice John Roberts presiding and all 100 senators as jurors. That’s what the Constitution says.

So, what’s the Republican senator’s response to questions on the substance of President Donald Trump’s alleged transgressions regarding Ukraine? Or what posture Republican senators should take in the face of mounting evidence there was a quid pro quo?

Here’s what the Washington Post reported:

“I’m a juror and I’m comfortable not speaking,” Sen. James E. Risch, RIdaho, said.

“I’d be a juror, so I have no comment,” Sen. Lamar Alexander, RTenn., said.

“I don’t need a strategy for impeachment because I may be a juror someday,” said Sen. Tim Scott, RS.C.

So I asked Sen. Richard Blumenthal what he thinks. Love him or hate him, Blumenthal is a former state attorney general and U.S. attorney and presumptively knows a thing or two about juries.

“The impeachment proceeding in the Senate is called a trial, but it’s not like a criminal trial,” he said in an interview. “The jurors in the Senate are not jurors as they would be in criminal trial. They’re not sequestered, and they can talk among themselves and say things outside the jury box. No Senate rules preclude that.”

So the Republicans who dodge reporters’ questions are using the juror thing as an excuse, right?

Well, yes and no. “We are public officials sitting through a Constitutionally mandated process,” Blumenthal said. “Just as they are not precluded from commenting, they also are not required to comment. They can say whatever they wish.” Or not say, evidently.

For the record, Blumenthal’s answer to the question dodged by Republican colleagues: “Right now the most clear and convincing evidence comes from (Trump’s) own words. The transcript shows the president pressuring a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent for his own personal benefit.”

But Republicans argue there’s no explicit quid pro quo in the transcript. What about that?

“There’s nothing in the Constitution that says there has to be a quid pro quo (to show) the president betrayed his oath of office.”

Strange bedfellows

The Social Security trust fund has surprised all its harsh crystalball gazers, who predicted it would not be able to pay full benefits by this time. Gen Xers of the 1990s vintage, now safely ensconced in middle age, used to say things like space aliens visiting Earth are more likely than Social Security being solvent by the time they retire.

Sorry, guys, but I don’t think so. The system’s 2019 projection is full benefits for everyone (old age, survivors, disabled) until 2035, a year later that last year’s forecast.

But Rep. John Larson is not leaving anything to chance. He’s chairman of the House Ways & Means subcommittee on Social Security, and now he’s partnering with none other than AOC — legendary freshman Rep. Alexandria OcasioCortez, DN.Y. — on a bill to shore up Social Security for the long haul.

It’s quite a contrast. Grandfatherly Larson, a 71yearold Hartford native and former president pro tem of the state Senate, is a longtime liberal devotee of social policy, much like Rep. Rosa DeLauro.

AOC, of course, is the firebrand who represents a district encompassing parts of the Bronx and Queens. She’s the GOP’s favorite bogeywoman, which paints her as the second coming of Che Guevara, or maybe Joe Stalin.

But even if she’s an unrepentant socialist, her tough inyourface posture at age 30 makes her a fave of leftprogressives nationwide.

In a video to roll out their Social Security 2100 Act, Larson extolls AOC as a nextgen fighter for protecting and propping up Social Security.

“We’re going through a very difficult time now and Social Security could be cut,” Larson said.

Pointing to AOC, he continued: “But because of the efforts of people who understand and know the problems of Social Security first hand like AlexandriaOcasio Cortez, we’re in a better position to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

Larson sounded a little tentative in his pronunciation of AOC’s name but got through it with nary a wordgarble.

For her part, AOC recalled her childhood when as a teenager her father died and Social Security became a lifeline.

“We have a critical opportunity not just to save Social Security but embolden it, expand it and preserve it so that it can be handed over to the next generation,” she said,

The bill would raise benefits by 2 percent, charge payroll taxes to employees making more than $400,000 (the current cutoff is $132,900), improve the COLA for vulnerable beneficiaries and raise the threshold for taxing benefits.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images Sen. Richard Blumenthal, DConn., is speaking out on the impeachment process — unlike many of his Republican counterparts.