Posted on 12/16/2019 7:28:24 AM PST by Liberty7732
Current events always bring about the most powerful teaching moments. Today’s question can be generally formed as:
“What is the remedy when articles of impeachment are established that do not comply with the terms of the Constitution?”
The Constitution lays out very specific terms for impeachment in Article 2 section 4 of the Constitution. According to the Constitution impeachment can only be brought for four specific crimes: Bribery, Treason, High Crimes, or Misdemeanors. Any article of impeachment that is outside those four crimes is completely unconstitutional. So what can the people do, Constitutionally, when articles of impeachment are brought by the House outside those four authorized terms?
Those who ratified our Constitution knew that those in government would always be tempted, for reasons they would attempt to justify, to try to work outside the boundaries of the Constitution. James Madison, “Father of the Constitution” and our fourth President even called our Constitution a “parchment barrier,” knowing that the document itself would have no force to keep the politically ambitious within the Constitution’s limited and defined boundaries. It was always considered, and will always be the duty of the citizens to control those they place in government.
Understanding the constitutional solution to this political problem requires understanding that the structure of government created by the Constitution is not the structure of government we currently have operating outside the Constitution. When those holding the trust of public office leave behind the standard of the Constitution, the people have a duty to correct their course. When the power to impeach is exercised to satisfy political lusts rather than comply with Constitutional standards, what is the solution that exists within the established constitutional framework?
The first thing we must remind ourselves is, the people didn’t elect the president. The office of the president was not created to be a representative of the people; the president was created to be an ambassador for the States in foreign affairs. For that reason, the States elect the president through the electoral college. This is not a bad thing. As a matter of fact, the electoral college was established for specific reasons; first and foremost to protect the liberty and authority of the people. (If this principle seems strange to you, please read what those who drafted the Constitution said about the Electoral College: http://bit.ly/ElectoralCollegeTruth)
With that first principle in mind, here is the solution to the question: what is the check and balance upon unconstitutional articles of impeachment:
1. Because the president is a representative of the States, elected by the States, an improper impeachment is a disenfranchisement of the States.
2. Since it is the States’ vote that is being overturned, the remedy exists in the States. It is the obligation of every State Governor and Legislator to bring a lawsuit against the enforcement of the articles of impeachment and the members of Congress violating the specific terms of impeachment.
3. Because the purpose of the Senate is to represent the States in federal government, it is also imperative that those Senators representing States who chose the President, absent proper ground for impeachment, must not only oppose the House articles of impeachment, they must vote against conviction.
As a final note if truth, the Senators are representatives of their State as a whole, not the people of their State and not themselves. So if the State selected the president and if true grounds for impeachment are absent, a Senator MUST oppose the impeachment regardless of personal opinions and the opinions of a portion of the people of the State.
The designers of our Constitution crafted that document to be simply written so that the average person in 1788 could read and understand how their government was required to operate. The designed the solutions to be simply but necessarily applied by the people.
“If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.” Federalist #33
However, because the American education system no longer teaches the essential principles driving the proper application of our Constitution, the remedies often evade our view and the people slip into overwhelming frustrations due to a perceived lack of options. As Thomas Jefferson remarked in a letter to Charles Yancy in 1816:
“…if a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was & never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty & property of their constituents. there is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information.”
Those who designed and ratified our Constitution gave us very powerful options, we simply need to apply those options to make the necessary course corrections. Application must begin with proper education. With this understanding, now we can demand our Governors and State Legislators exercise their duty in authority to be a necessary check and balance upon an unauthorized and unconstitutional behavior of those in the federal government.
The Senate should REFUSE to hear the case, as it is unconstitutional for the reasons stated in your post.
SEND IT BACK to the House. If they cannot find high crimes or misdemeanors, they should not attempt to submit it again.
End of impeachment!
This impeachment nonsense is not some kind of political argument between the Democrat Party and the Republican Party.
This impeachment baloney is the leaders of the Democrat Party using the threat of impeachment to try to keep anyone from investigating their crimes.
It’s a Democrat stall and smokescreen operation to try to keep their leaders from being rightfully punished for the crimes that they have committed.
Comes from seven decades of allowing this behavior to flourish with out consequences.
The Democrat Party has paid off our judges and government employees, especially law enforcement, to look the other way and protect the Democrat Party leaders as they steal from our treasuries.
I agree. For the Senate to proceed with a trial based on an unconstitutional impeachment delivered from the House would be just another unconstitutional act flowing from this political travesty.
Lost me there!
The remedy against partisan impeachment is an narrow article two amendment that moves the standard off 50%+1 or a rebuke by the American People of the abusers of partisan impeachment against Trump which seems unlikely because of what party is pursuing it and how the Media will support it.
What happens if the Senate votes to convict, but it is less than the 2/3 required by the Constitution? First off, the Communist traitors will holler and scream that he was convicted but won’t leave office. New article of impeachment.
Second, they will criticize the Republicans in the Senate of being biased and the vote was illegitimate. One house against the other; one party against the other. Physical violence.
Finally, there will be a push to amend the Constitution for 51% conviction in the Senate.
The Chief Justice should do this. It's one of the things judges do sometimes. The Chief Justice isn't supposed to act as a ventriloquist's dummy.
ML/NJ
Lost me there!
It's absolutely the case, although somewhat obscured by the 17th amendment. This nation is the United States... not the United Peoples.
Just a technicality, it's the people that elect the President.
“Senators are representatives of their State as a whole, not the people of their State and not themselves”
Senators are elected by the people, not an electoral college, so I find fallacy in this statement.
If the state’s Governor appointed the Senators, then I would concur.
Not allowing our Reps to take part in the sham would be a start.
If one-person is one-vote, then I’d agree, the people elect the president.
Thank goodness, that it’s not the case, or Canky would now be POTUS.
With a popular vote by state, it is the state that essentially elects the president.
It is the State legislatures that originally selected Senators. With the 17th, we no longer have Senators... they are Sinators.
This point is a great rationale to move the Convention of States to fruition. Repeal the 17th, among a few other big items, to restore the Republic and the Constitution.
McConnell should just say this is an invalid impeachment cite the reasons For example The Rats had two past precedent to follow, both allowed the contending sides to have their say. The Rats didn’t do that, presented a one-sided partisan impeachment. So I am throwing it out!’. O course the rats and media will howl. McConnell’s answer should be ‘Make it an issue in 2020 and run on that!’. Everyone normal will be happy its off the tube and its a losing issue to run on ! To do any more gives it credence!
Exactly. By participating, they have legitimized not only an illegitimate proceeding, but a totally unconstitutional one at that.
#4 of “four specific crimes” is “misdemeanors?” I think not. If even misdemeanors are impeachable, why have a list? Nor is “misdemeanors” at all specific.
A technicality, for sure, but an important one. The liberals know this. That’s why they want popular vote instead of Electoral College.
Point trying to be made is this - we vote for ELECTORS who pledge to vote for a particular candidate. It is NOT against the law for them to vote otherwise if there are not enough votes to put someone over the top on the first round of Electoral College voting. Could easily happen with a popular third-party candidate.
I think it was actually expected in the first Presidential elections, when “parties” were not really defined. As a matter of fact, John Adams was the first Vice-President because he came in SECOND to Washington - They were both running for President and there were no “package deals” of Pres/VP early on. He got the second most votes in the Electoral College, beating out John Hancock. He actually did not agree with Washington on several things, and worked against him.
Now that we have the parties which George Washington, among others, warned us about, it absolutely does appear that the people elect the President. But, that’s not the case. We actually elect a delegation from our state to go and vote, trusting they will look after our interests on the state level. Look at the ballot in 2020. The candidate’s name is in big letters, but the pledged Electors’ names should be printed there next to where you put your “X”.
Now to the reason the libs want popular vote instead of Electoral College: Senators were originally selected by State Legislatures - to look after our interests at the State level. Until we were stupid enough to pass the 17th amendment to the Constitution... You see what popular vote has done to THAT...
So, no, the people do not elect the President, the States do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.