The low bar being set by the Democrats with the Articles of Impeachment are a danger to our Republic. The first Article is that the President "abused" his power. The second charges the President with Obstructing Congress.[1] But the reasoning and justification for these charges is so weak they threaten to set a low bar, opening the door for either party who lost an election to bring charges to undo the will of the people by removing a President.
Article 1 is titled "Abuse of Power." The Article states "Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election."[1]
Put aside the question of whether the facts support this charge, which is debatable, let's see another example of how this low standard could be applied. Consider that in 2012, President Obama personally asked the Russian President to "give him 'space' until after the November election." This was captured on camera and via a hot microphone.[2] Thus there is first hand evidence that could have been used to accuse President Obama of asking a foreign leader to influence the 2012 Presidential Election and thus charge him with "Abuse of Power" under the new standard created by the Democrats in Article 1.
Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment is titled "Obstruction of Congress." This Article states "...without lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed Executive Branch agencies, offices, and officials not to comply with ... lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives."[1]
Again putting aside the question of whether the facts support this charge[3], let's see another example of how this low standard could be applied. Again, using the Obama Administration as our example, we know the Obama Administration repeatedly defied Congressional requests and subpoenas for information. We don't know if President Obama ordered any of that, but it happened and under the standard being set President Obama could have been impeached for Obstruction of Congress.
The Articles of Impeachment conclude by saying "...President Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law."[1]
I'm curious. Where in that statement does it say Congress is impeaching President Trump for "... Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"[1], which is the Constitutional basis for Impeachment? I believe a case can be made that through his excessive use of Presidential Executive Orders that many believed exceeded his authority, the exact same statements can be made about President Obama.
The beauty of our Constitution is that if a President truly acts in a manner that threatens the Constitution or is incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law, the Constitution provided three other ways to address this without impeaching a President. We have two other branches of government that can check the President's powers. Congress can enact laws to change or repeal the actions of the President. Courts can block the actions of the President. And if those don't work we have elections every four years, where people can remove someone from the office of President if they do not like what he or she is doing.
The Democrats are creating such a low bar for impeachment. We have seen in the past that when one party lowers the bar, the other party will use that precedent when the tables are turned. For example, the Democrats lowered the number of votes required to approve judges and Supreme Court Justices and Republicans complained when they did so. When Republicans retook the majority in the Senate did they change the Senate rules back? No. They kept the rules the same and have been using them to approve President Trump's appointees.
If the Democrats create a very low bar for impeachment because they did not like the results of the 2016 Election, they invite the Republicans use the same basis to impeach a Democrat President they don't like. As much as I disliked President Obama's policies, I would not have wanted him impeached using these standards any more than I want to see President Trump impeached under these standards.
If you really dislike President Donald Trump that much, replace the name Trump with Obama as I suggested above and re-read the Articles of Impeachment.
Now, for a moment, forget whether you're a Republican, Democrat or Independent. Forget whether you're a Conservative or Progressive or Liberal. Just be an American and ask yourself, is this Impeachment really good for our Country? As an American, I say it is not.
Sources and supporting arguments:
[1] https://www.npr.org/2019/12/10/786579846/read-articles-of-impeachment-against-president-trump
[2] https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jeffrey-lord/2019/12/14/washington-post-impeaches-its-credibility
[3] For example, the Article 2 says the President did not have lawful cause to oppose the Congressional subpoenas. But we know the Executive Branch of Government does have a right of Executive Privilege. Deciding whether a subpoena supersedes Executive Privilege is usually a decision for the Courts to decide. Did Congress go to Court and get a Court ruling deciding that? No they did not. Therefore, it seems by Article 2 Congress is taking the role of the Judicial branch of government and deciding what powers the President has and doesn't have.
Article 1 is titled "Abuse of Power." The Article states "Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election."[1]
Put aside the question of whether the facts support this charge, which is debatable, let's see another example of how this low standard could be applied. Consider that in 2012, President Obama personally asked the Russian President to "give him 'space' until after the November election." This was captured on camera and via a hot microphone.[2] Thus there is first hand evidence that could have been used to accuse President Obama of asking a foreign leader to influence the 2012 Presidential Election and thus charge him with "Abuse of Power" under the new standard created by the Democrats in Article 1.
Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment is titled "Obstruction of Congress." This Article states "...without lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed Executive Branch agencies, offices, and officials not to comply with ... lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives."[1]
Again putting aside the question of whether the facts support this charge[3], let's see another example of how this low standard could be applied. Again, using the Obama Administration as our example, we know the Obama Administration repeatedly defied Congressional requests and subpoenas for information. We don't know if President Obama ordered any of that, but it happened and under the standard being set President Obama could have been impeached for Obstruction of Congress.
The Articles of Impeachment conclude by saying "...President Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law."[1]
I'm curious. Where in that statement does it say Congress is impeaching President Trump for "... Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"[1], which is the Constitutional basis for Impeachment? I believe a case can be made that through his excessive use of Presidential Executive Orders that many believed exceeded his authority, the exact same statements can be made about President Obama.
The beauty of our Constitution is that if a President truly acts in a manner that threatens the Constitution or is incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law, the Constitution provided three other ways to address this without impeaching a President. We have two other branches of government that can check the President's powers. Congress can enact laws to change or repeal the actions of the President. Courts can block the actions of the President. And if those don't work we have elections every four years, where people can remove someone from the office of President if they do not like what he or she is doing.
The Democrats are creating such a low bar for impeachment. We have seen in the past that when one party lowers the bar, the other party will use that precedent when the tables are turned. For example, the Democrats lowered the number of votes required to approve judges and Supreme Court Justices and Republicans complained when they did so. When Republicans retook the majority in the Senate did they change the Senate rules back? No. They kept the rules the same and have been using them to approve President Trump's appointees.
If the Democrats create a very low bar for impeachment because they did not like the results of the 2016 Election, they invite the Republicans use the same basis to impeach a Democrat President they don't like. As much as I disliked President Obama's policies, I would not have wanted him impeached using these standards any more than I want to see President Trump impeached under these standards.
If you really dislike President Donald Trump that much, replace the name Trump with Obama as I suggested above and re-read the Articles of Impeachment.
Now, for a moment, forget whether you're a Republican, Democrat or Independent. Forget whether you're a Conservative or Progressive or Liberal. Just be an American and ask yourself, is this Impeachment really good for our Country? As an American, I say it is not.
Sources and supporting arguments:
[1] https://www.npr.org/2019/12/10/786579846/read-articles-of-impeachment-against-president-trump
[2] https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jeffrey-lord/2019/12/14/washington-post-impeaches-its-credibility
[3] For example, the Article 2 says the President did not have lawful cause to oppose the Congressional subpoenas. But we know the Executive Branch of Government does have a right of Executive Privilege. Deciding whether a subpoena supersedes Executive Privilege is usually a decision for the Courts to decide. Did Congress go to Court and get a Court ruling deciding that? No they did not. Therefore, it seems by Article 2 Congress is taking the role of the Judicial branch of government and deciding what powers the President has and doesn't have.
Comments