Current Events: The Latest News on the Coronavirus Pandemic

Introduction 

Hearings of the impeachment of the current US President, Donald Trump, are making news all around the globe for a few weeks now. The world is eager to listen to the testimonies of the witnesses that include former aides to the administration, and ambassador to Ukraine, former aides to the White House among many other witnesses. This comes after the Speaker to the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, caved into tremendous pressure she was receiving from her party members for a long time. People are eager to listen to the gravity of the case the Democrats in the House of Representatives will achieve against the President and whether it will be enough grounds to remove President Trump from office. Being only the third case of impeachment of its kind ever to be conducted in the entire history of the United States, different news outlets approached the matter variously in their news reportage. 

Literature Review 

In explaining the story of the impeachment of President Trump, The Independent Newspaper delved into the inside story that could see Mr Trump as the third US President to be found guilty of a crime and removed from office. As a matter of coincidence, the newspaper article uses a picture of the President seated together with the President of Ukraine (LaFraniere, 2019). Perhaps this method is used in an attempt to sway readers from the primary issue, which is the issue of bribery. The article claims that the phone call from The President to Ukraine was scripted and was aimed at earning an advantage throughout the 2016 elections. Moreover, the report claims that White House aids sat around a speaker with note pads ready to note down every detail of the conversation. At the end of the interview, the President asks the Ukranian leader to do the US favour. Therefore the newspaper takes a head-on approach and does not hold any reservations for calling things out as they are. 

The Huffington Post Magazine applies a different approach in explaining the details concerning the President’s impeachment. The author makes it clear from the heading of the story that he is pro-impeachment of the President and even speaks as though privy to some classified information that may be incriminating for the President (Moran, 2019). The title says anyone who would like to believe the narrative of the President’s defence team needs to ignore individual core values and principles of critical thinking and necessarily has to ignore the very essentials of critical thinking (Moran, 2019). One of the things you would have to ignore to believe the Trump legal team is the transcript of the call between the President and his counterpart from Ukraine. The transcript forms the very foundation for the entire inquiry and ignoring it essentially means throwing out the case. The author mostly weaves the narrative that the President is caught and cannot go free at any cost. 

The CBC News outlet employs a rather laid back approach in its explanation and narration of the story. It merely reports that a former US Ambassador to the US testifies against the President. The article says the Ambassador was born in Canada to immigrant parents who fled from the communist and the Nazi regime (Stahl, 2019). Their family later moved to Connecticut when she was three years old. According to the paper, she used the nickname Masha and graduated from Princeton University. She was a student of the former Soviet Union and hence her work as a diplomat in Ukraine. The article seems to be offering an opinion different from all the others. However, the material is overly conservative and too careful about the issues of slander and defamation (Stahl, 2019). She says she was removed from her job by the President for doing her job in trying to root out corruption from Ukraine. Therefore, the CBC newspaper takes a conservative approach in revealing vital information but manages to show substantial intelligence regardless. 

In an article whose by-line says "staff and agencies,” the Guardian Newspaper seems to throw direct jabs at the President using the words of the Speaker of the House of Representatives (Guardian, 2019). The article states that the Democrats are mostly refining the language they are using for their case in the impeachment of President Trump. The Speaker to the House, Pelosi is brushing aside the term "quid pro quo" that many of the democrats are using to define the case against Trump. Instead, she selected the term "bribery" because it would resonate more with the Americans. The hearings were reportedly staged to launch a political battle for the American population that would see the removal of the 45 th President of the US from power (Guardian, 2019). The Speaker is seen to change her stance on the matter of Trump impeachment after she had managed to resist the pressure from the Democrats for a long time and now she had done an about-turn and decided to pursue the matter to its eventuality. 

Analysis of Literature 

LaFraniere (2019) seeks to uncover the background information concerning the steps that got the US to the point of wanting to impeach the President in the Independent Magazine article. She states that the entire background story of impeaching President Trump originated from the inquiries into Russia’s interference of the 2016 US elections by Robert Mueller. The author invokes the history of the US and the Soviet Union by stating that once again the plot entails the involvement of foreign powers that are not necessarily affiliated to the US and how they try to interfere with the sovereignty of the US by influencing the outcomes of the democratic process (LaFraniere, 2019). This view of the story further reminds the reader of the fact that the US has not been the best of allies since the end of the Second World War and that the actions of the President were going to lead to a reaction. 

The Guardian Magazine takes a slightly pointed approach in its reportage of the news in saying that the actions of the President amount to bribery. The article used the words of the House Speaker to launch an offensive against the brazen acts of misconduct against the President with regards to his language on the social media platforms concerning the Russia inquiries (Guardian, 2019). The article insinuates that both the Republicans and the Democrats are hardening their stance to their supporters, making it hard for them to make a decision (Guardian, 2019). The story is unique because it provides a narrative highlighting the view of the Ukranian side of the story. Tramp needed help with winning the election the same way that Ukraine wanted US protection from Russia. According to the article, the main issue is for the Democrats to convince the electorate regarding the dangers of a sitting US President to seek the assistance of a distant country like Ukraine. 

The Huffington Post goes deeper into the story and gives the names of the witnesses who have offered to testify against the President in what was termed as a breach of the constitution. Moran (2019) goes on to outline the weight of the testimony by Alexander Vindmans, which is a direct implication for the reputation of the Presidency (Moran, 2019). In explaining the case of the President, the author reiterates the fact that the Office of the President of the United States is supposed to be beyond reproach and must not be held to account for any such mistakes (Moran, 2019). The author mentions that the Trump Administration was and remains responsible for their downfall and the author seems to have made up his mind about the verdict of the case. The admission of a quid quo pro by a member of the Trump team is seen as an essential piece of evidence for the case against the President. 

In the same laid back fashion, the CBC News lays a biography of the former US envoy to Ukraine mentioning the fact that she has worked under two Democrat Presidents and one Republican President. The approach the article takes seems too careful and is an effort to avoid slander in a bid to maintain political correctness. It notes that the former Ambassador by the name Yovanovitch had already testified behind a closed door and was only going to further her testimony before the House of Representatives. She claimed she had abruptly been removed from her position. She has been told to tweet praise to the President as a way of helping her keep her job. The testimony of the former Ambassador follows other similar statements that had been given in the week before the House hearing. Although the article does not seem to delve deep into the matter, it outlines some essential details concerning the trial that will ultimately determine the verdict of the case. 

Conclusion 

Overall, people are eager to listen to the gravity of the case the Democrats in the House of Representatives will achieve against the President and whether it will be enough grounds to remove President Trump from office. Being only the third case of impeachment of its kind ever to be conducted in the entire history of the United States, different news outlets approached the matter variously in their news reportage. From the way, the newspaper outlets report the story it is easy to see that nearly all of them are eager to see the President impeached to know the complexity that will arise in the issue of law. All the newspapers use different forms of appeal to capture the reader's attention and whip some emotions within the mind. All the articles achieve the fundamental purpose of news reporting, which is communication. 

References 

Guardian. (2019). Nancy Pelosi says Trump's actions toward Ukraine amount to 'bribery' . Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/14/nancy-pelosi-trump-ukraine-bribery 

LaFraniere, S. (2019). The inside story of the phone call that could see Trump impeached: As the impeachment enquiry enters its public phase, what exactly led us to this point? Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry-explained-ukraine-zelensky-phone-call-a9200121.html 

Moran, L. (2019). Don Lemon Lists All The Facts ‘You’d Have To Ignore’ To Buy GOP’s Trump Defense: The CNN host also warned against becoming distracted during the impeachment inquiry. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/don-lemon-impeachment-trump-list_n_5dce74dee4b0d2e79f8a8d93 

Stahl, C. (2019). Impeachment hearings: Live updates from Yovanovitch's testimony: The former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine is giving a public statement in the House's impeachment inquiry. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/live-blog/impeachment-hearings-live-updates-yovanovitch-s-testimony-n1082501