[Rolling Stone] A Conversation With Tom Steyer, Liberal Billionaire Bankrolling Trump’s Impeachment

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/who-is-tom-steyer-w522136

A Conversation With Tom Steyer, the Liberal Billionaire Bankrolling Trump’s Impeachment
He strongly disagrees with Nancy Pelosi and other powerful Democrats who claim impeachment is off the table

"Yeah, we're making a big fuss – because something is wrong. Everyone's acting as though it’s somehow impolite to stand up for American democracy," says Tom Steyer, whose Need to Impeach campaign has collected 5.4 million signatures for Trump's ouster. Drew Angerer/Getty
By Tim Dickinson
22 hours ago

For many progressives, it's obvious that President Trump deserves to be impeached. From his campaign's collaboration with Russia to his admitted obstruction of justice in firing James Comey to his profiting from the office of the presidency to his ceaseless lying and attacks on the free press – the articles of impeachment almost write themselves.

But top Democrats in Washington see impeachment talk as a headache for the 2018 midterms, where the party's focus is to persuade independent voters on issues like health care and pocketbook economics. In a recent Rolling Stone profile, House Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi argued that the buzz about removing Trump benefits the GOP. That stance puts Pelosi at odds with one of the party's richest backers, her "friend" and "former neighbor" Tom Steyer. The liberal San Francisco billionaire has invested $40 million in a grassroots campaign to build momentum for impeachment. "I wish he would spend the money pointing out the horror show that the tax bill is," Pelosi said of Steyer.

Steyer, who made his fortune as a hedge-fund manager, built the Need to Impeach campaign as an offshoot of his group NextGen America, best known for climate advocacy. He says his impeachment initiative is not only essential for protecting the rule of law in America – it can also be a potent electoral force, activating millions of younger voters who usually sit out elections because they've lost faith in the Democratic Party.

Need to Impeach has gathered 5.4 million signatures supporting Trump's ouster – primarily for violating the emoluments clause of the Constitution (by taking business funds from foreign governments) and obstructing justice in the Russia probe, among other offenses.

Rolling Stone reached out to Steyer to talk about the practicality of removing Trump (which would require a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate to be successful), the risks of "normalizing" the president's behavior, and whether Steyer himself has greater political ambitions.

Why do you think Democrats should embrace impeachment as a campaign issue?
We feel it's important to stand up for the American democracy. It's not much more complicated than that. We believe fighting against a reckless and lawless president is not something that will turn off voters. In fact, doing that kind of thing is the way that you build faith and trust. The way we see impeachment is: We are telling the truth about the most important political issue of the day. I know Nancy doesn't believe that this is a good idea. But we believe what we are doing will inspire people to vote who otherwise wouldn't, and that's not just a vague hope. We have 5.4 million people who signed our petition. We communicate with them all the time. Over 60 percent of them don't vote. They're registered voters, but they don't vote.

Do you know why?
They say because our Democratic leaders are not standing for anything. They've lost faith and trust in the party. Look at the Women's March – the largest protest in history. Look at Indivisible. Look at the 2017 elections in Virginia, New Jersey, Alabama. People are turning out to protect our democracy. To a very large extent this election will be a referendum on this president, this administration and their policies and behavior.

The concern is: "Are we going to energize Republicans?" – and I think that's Nancy's fear. Or are we going to energize Americans and Democrats and independents by doing what's right?

Young people turn out at half the rate of other American citizens. They tell us every day that the reason they don't turn out is they don't believe in the system and they don't trust the parties. It’s very hard for me to believe – as the father of four millennials – that the way to convince them that we are trustworthy, that we are moral, that we take things seriously and that we have their backs, is by burying the truth.

You feel that taking impeachment off the table is "burying the truth?" Help me understand that.
The first question is: Has this president met the criteria for impeachment? We think it's unequivocal that he has. You can go on our website and hear a two-hour disquisition by constitutional scholars on that. But I'd just refer you to the fact that his personal company, owned by him, just took a $500 million loan from the Chinese government, which is absolutely forbidden under the Constitution. If you're looking for a "smoking gun," that one is belching smoke. He can say, "I didn't fire Comey over Russia,” but he already said, "I fired him over the Russian thing." We're not wondering whether this guy has met the criteria for impeachment. It's not even close.

* * *

In a recent interview you suggested not impeaching Trump is normalizing him. What do you mean?
Once you don't speak up against lawlessness, lawlessness is permitted. So if you don't say anything about the president taking a $500 million loan from the Chinese government – now you're allowed to take $500 million from a foreign government. That's something that's specifically prohibited by the Constitution. His family is getting all these [foreign trademarks], and his son-in-law [Jared Kushner] is getting another $500 million loan from the government of Qatar. And you can't [bring it up] two years later and say, "Now we're opposed to this."

It's like being at a dinner party and somebody makes a racial slur and you speak up and say, "I think that's really wrong, and you should take that back," and everyone says, "Ooooh, you're making a big fuss here." Like, yeah, we're making a big fuss – because something is wrong. Everyone's acting as though it's somehow impolite to stand up for American democracy.

Speaking to Pelosi, she's an institutionalist – and seems to believe that checks and balances that are less heroic than impeachment can correct the course.
Can I address that, since you just threw kerosene onto the fire? The normal checks and balances are for the Senate Judiciary and the House Judiciary Committee to investigate the president's behavior – that is not happening. So you can believe in checks and balances as much as you want, but that is not the real world.

Maybe I wasn’t clear, the idea is that Democrats, returning to power in the House, would have subpoena power. She pointed to how she dealt with George W. Bush – whom many wanted to impeach. She believes the decision to take impeachment off the table helped Democrats take the House in 2006, and paved a path to Obama and a deeper correction.
I remember 2006. What happened is that George W. Bush, he put us in two disastrous wars and we were headed toward the biggest financial disaster since the Great Depression. So if the answer is that we need those three things to happen for a course correction, I'd prefer to move a little quicker. How about that? But I take your point. Maybe we can have, like, a nuclear war and then we get a real course correction.
​

more at the link