On Politics With Lisa Lerer: Trump Had a Bad Week. Things Could Soon Get Worse.

Democrats are eager to investigate the president from every angle possible when they take over the House; plus, a Brexit guide from across the pond. [Trouble seeing this email? View in browser]( [The New York Times]( [The New York Times]( December 13, 2018 | Evening Edition [Lisa Lerer] Hi. Welcome to On Politics, your guide to the day in national politics. I’m Lisa Lerer, your host. “Dirty deeds.” “Agreed and conspired.” And payoffs in “cooperation, consultation and concert” with President Trump’s campaign. This week couldn’t have gone any better for Democrats if they’d scripted it themselves. Let’s recap, shall we? The president’s longtime personal lawyer was [sentenced to prison](. A [tabloid publisher admitted]( that they paid off a Playboy model to protect Mr. Trump. And a Russian agent who supported his campaign[pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy](. Then there was the televised meeting with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer that concluded with the president vowing to take the blame for a looming government shutdown. And how could we forget Ms. Pelosi [insulting Mr. Trump’s manhood]( “As if manhood can be associated with him,” she told dozens of her notoriously leaky colleagues in the House. “Is Trump doomed?” [blared the headlines](. [Reports citing]( ever-present “people close to the president” said that despite his public bluster, Mr. Trump is worried about impeachment. So, yes, Democrats are right to feel good this week. But sometimes, in politics, feeling too good can cause the worst falls. In exactly three weeks, Democrats will get their first taste of real power in the Trump era when they retake control of the House. And a whole lot of them are itching for payback. That’s a dangerous approach for the party, says former Representative Henry Waxman, a California Democrat once dubbed the “[Bush administration’s worst nightmare”]( for his series of investigations as the chairman of the House Oversight Committee. “I don’t think they should be moving to impeachment right away,” he told me this week. “If they’re going to get there they have to get all the facts first.” ADVERTISEMENT He added: “Democrats should pursue the facts and not get ahead of the facts.” Mr. Waxman isn’t alone in urging some prudence when it comes to investigations. Last week, a group of incoming House freshmen [sent a letter]( asking Democratic leadership to prioritize action on health care, immigration, infrastructure and other issues over investigations. But the pent-up energy within the party for taking on Mr. Trump is inescapable. Various Democratic politicians want to investigate the president’s financial deals, his business ties to Russia, his handling of Saudi Arabia and North Korea, his efforts to undercut the special counsel investigation, his children’s business and political affairs, and a long list of agencies and cabinet secretaries. And earlier today, Ms. Pelosi said that a House committee would take the “first steps” toward getting Mr. Trump’s tax returns next year. And while House Democratic leaders and committee chairs are saying that impeachment must wait until the special counsel issues his report, they’re already under tremendous pressure from their base to move forward. [Some polling shows]( that nearly two-thirds of voters who supported Democrats in the midterms believe Congress should act on impeachment proceedings immediately. But impeachment carries its own risks: The process is not only difficult, particularly when control of Congress is split, but politically treacherous. Successfully impeaching a president begins with an investigation by the House Judiciary Committee, which draws up articles of impeachment. Those require support from a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate. Few politicians want to be the Republican who votes to impeach Mr. Trump only to see the effort fall short. As Representative Jerrold Nadler, the incoming Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, put it on CNN this weekend, there’s a difference between can impeach and should impeach. “An impeachment is an attempt to, in effect, overturn or change the result of the last election,” he said. “And you should do it only for very serious situations.” ____________________ Meanwhile, across the pond... Tolga Akmen/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images The United Kingdom is currently dealing with its own political crisis: Brexit. But the topic can be hard for us Yanks to wrap our heads around. So we reached out to our colleague Sarah Lyall to help us understand what’s going on. Lisa: Uh, so is Britain O.K.? There’s yelling, [grabbing of the ceremonial mace]( and threats to oust Theresa May. What in the world is going on over there? Sarah: It depends what you mean by “O.K.” Britain has not exploded, burst into flames or slid into the sea as part of a giant mudslide, but the Brexit process has been a chaotic mess, a combination of farce and tragedy underpinned by fear and ignorance. Nobody likes the Prime Minister’s carefully negotiated plan for how the country might extricate itself from the European Union, but there is no Plan B — and without one in place by the March deadline, Britain would end up departing under far worse terms than anyone can really conceive of. So [Mrs.]( survived]( to fight another war — but it’s a doozy. The E.U. says there’s not much room for compromise, and there’s not enough support for the E.U. plan in the U.K. What happens now? Could Brexit just get canceled? Those things are all true. Mrs. May is still prime minister, but has promised to step down before the next election. (If I were her, I personally would not be able to get out of there fast enough.) She is trying to see what concessions she might extract from E.U. leaders, who are in no mood to grant any concessions at all. Pro-Brexit forces would like a tougher deal; anti-Brexit forces would prefer that the whole thing just went away. It is conceivable that, as former Prime Minister John Major (a Tory, like Mrs. May and her enemies from the right, FWIW) argued earlier this week, Britain could simply “stop the clock” on Brexit while it figures out what to do next, but no one knows how that would really work. Could there be a second referendum in which Britons could decide that, on second thought, they would prefer not to have Brexit? Maybe, but no one knows how that would really work, either. How has that uncertainty impacted life in the U.K.? Are voters nervous about all this? People in the U.K. are, variously, dumbfounded, flabbergasted, angry, scared and fed up. Some are stockpiling food and medicine in case a no-deal Brexit messes up import and export structures. Businesses — and Europeans — in Britain are not sure what this will mean for them. The pound has been steadily falling against the dollar. It is winter, which means it is very dark, the weather is bad, and a thin blanket of alarm and dispiritedness has fallen over the country. How about for those of us in the States? Is there anything we should take away from this? The lesson for any country is, Don’t allow voters to make major foreign- and trade-policy decisions through ill-conceived popular referendums unless you are absolutely sure of the consequences. ____________________ News you may have missed With no elections on the horizon (please don’t ruin our denial of the 10,000 Democrats already running for president), political news bubbles up from all kinds of places. To make sure you don’t miss anything major, we’re introducing … The Catch Up? The Rundown? The Briefing? We don’t have a name for it yet, [send us recommendations](mailto:onpolitics@nytimes.com?te=1&nl=politics&emc=edit_cn_2018121320181213)! Here are some of the stories we’ve been paying attention to this week: • Julián Castro, the former Housing and Urban Development secretary, moved toward a presidential bid this week when [he announced the formation]( of an exploratory committee. Some close to Mr. Castro told me the thinking was that, by getting in early, Mr. Castro could distinguish himself in a crowded field — a move that felt more important given that his fellow Texan Beto O’Rourke is weighing a bid. • A lot has happened in the North Carolina voter fraud investigation since we [chatted with our reporter on the scene]( last week. First, reports emerged that [early voter data may have been released to Republicans]( in the same county where they are accused of tampering with early ballots. Then, it was revealed that similar patterns of possible fraud [could be found in the Republican primary](. Finally, the state Legislature decided that if there’s a do-over in the election, [there must be one in the primary, too](. • We need to tawk about New Joizy. Democrats in the Garden State are attempting to, essentially, [write gerrymandering into the State Constitution](. The plan is attracting some surprising critics — including the state’s Democratic governor; Eric H. Holder Jr., the attorney general under President Barack Obama; and some national Democrats, who say it undercuts their case against like-minded power grabs by Republicans in Michigan and Wisconsin. (Editor Tom, a Jersey partisan, hates my faux accent. Sorry, not sorry.) ____________________ What to read tonight • A City Council candidate in Arkansas missed the chance to vote in his own election — and the result was a tie. [Now, it will be decided by a coin toss.]( Oof … sorry, guy. • Energy giants and conservative groups have been aggressively pushing for a rollback of fuel efficiency rules for automobiles, [a Times investigation found](. • “My favorite,” he said, “was a kid who left a note on the floor in his dorm room that said ‘sorry bros, had to ghost.’” Millennial workers are treating bosses like dates on Tinder: They’re ghosting on interviews, work and job offers, [the Washington Post reports.]( ____________________ … Seriously A 12-year-old boy lost his best friend to a devastating illness. Then [he raised thousands of dollars to make sure his friend had a headstone.]( I’m not crying, you’re crying. _____________________ Were you forwarded this newsletter? [Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox.]( Thanks for reading. Politics is more than what goes on inside the White House. On Politics brings you the people, issues and ideas reshaping our world. Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at [onpolitics@nytimes.com](mailto:onpolitics@nytimes.com?te=1&nl=politics&emc=edit_cn_2018121320181213). ADVERTISEMENT FOLLOW NYTimes [Facebook] [FACEBOOK]( [Twitter] [@nytimes]( Get more [NYTimes.com newsletters »]( | Get unlimited access to NYTimes.com and our NYTimes apps. [Subscribe »]( ABOUT THIS EMAIL You received this message because you signed up for NYTimes.com's Politics newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Manage Subscriptions]( | [Change Your Email]( | [Privacy Policy]( | [Contact]( | [Advertise]( Copyright 2018 The New York Times Company | 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018