Posted on 10/25/2019 7:01:26 PM PDT by karpov
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed committees investigating President Trump to “proceed under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry,” but the House has never authorized such an inquiry. Democrats have been seeking to impeach Mr. Trump since the party took control of the House, though it isn’t clear for what offense. Lawmakers and commentators have suggested various possibilities, but none amount to an impeachable offense. The effort is akin to a constitutionally proscribed bill of attainder—a legislative effort to punish a disfavored person. The Senate should treat it accordingly.
The impeachment power is quasi-judicial and differs fundamentally from Congress’s legislative authority. The Constitution assigns “the sole power of impeachment” to the House—the full chamber, which acts by majority vote, not by a press conference called by the Speaker. Once the House begins an impeachment inquiry, it may refer the matter to a committee to gather evidence with the aid of subpoenas. Such a process ensures the House’s political accountability, which is the key check on the use of impeachment power.
The House has followed this process every time it has tried to impeach a president. Andrew Johnson’s 1868 impeachment was predicated on formal House authorization, which passed 126-47. In 1974 the Judiciary Committee determined it needed authorization from the full House to begin an inquiry into Richard Nixon’s impeachment, which came by a 410-4 vote. The House followed the same procedure with Bill Clinton in 1998, approving a resolution 258-176, after receiving independent counsel Kenneth Starr’s report.
Mrs. Pelosi discarded this process in favor of a Trump-specific procedure without precedent in Anglo-American law. Rep. Adam Schiff’s Intelligence Committee and several other panels are questioning witnesses in secret. Mr. Schiff has defended this process by likening it to a grand jury considering whether to hand up an indictment.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Nancy made clear that the Constitution is meaningless when she falsely certified Obama as eligible, but only to Hawaii
https://canadafreepress.com/article/dnc-failed-to-certify-obama-as-eligible-in-most-states1
I concur on Trump ignoring it. But the if it makes it to the senate it will have been voted on by that point.
Thanks for posting!
Without a formal vote on an impeachment inquiry, the House can only submit request for information which the WH has no legal obligation to comply.
Great article. It debunks every single dumbocrat talking point. Everybody should read it.
“If the House impeaches Mr. Trump because it disapproves of a lawful exercise of his presidential authority, it will in effect have accused him of maladministration. The Framers rejected that amorphous concept because it would have allowed impeachment for mere political disagreements, rendering the president a ward of Congress and destroying the executive’s status as an independent, coequal branch of government.”
Nothing written in the Constitution requires that either.
If Nancy walks over to the Senate and pretends to be the House, what then?
Nadler walked into Court and pretended to be the House, and the Court agreed that he was.
Ignoring impeachment and giving Dems the green light to move the impeachment ball down the field is the absolute worst course of action. Naturally, that is what the GOP is doing. Trump will be impeached around January and the Senate will be thrown into chaos as Never Trump GOP Senators demand a “bipartisan” hearing of the charges. The media and Dems will be hysterical with glee. Book it.
“Alexis de Tocqueville observed in 1835: “A decline of public morals in the United States will probably be marked by the abuse of the power of impeachment as a means of crushing political adversaries or ejecting them from office.” What House Democrats are doing is not only unfair to Mr. Trump and a threat to all his successors. It is an attempt to overrule the constitutional process for selecting the president and thus subvert American democracy itself.”
I'll make two points.
1. Sean Hannity, as recently as today, said that Lindsey Graham should call Adam Schiff as a "fact witness" to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. I believe this to be unconstitutional.
Article I Section 6 says:
They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.This means that the Senate cannot call a House member for questioning on proceedings in the House. Schiff is immune from testifying in front of the Senate.
That said...
2. Article I Section 6 says:
They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
If someone can turn Schiff's apparent repeated lies into a felony perjury or witness tampering charge, then he loses the immunity protection from the Constitution. This would then make him a free target.
-PJ
P.S. If there is any truth to potential Schiff involvement in the serial deaths at the home of Democrat mega-donor Ed Buck, then Schiff is potentially vulnerable to the "Breach of the Peace" exception, as well.
-PJ
Given that the House is engaged in unconstitutional activities and clearly under the control of a far-left cabal, Trump must act to enforce the Constitution.
Trump’s unitary executive power gives him the power to do whatever is necessary to protect the country from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
If protecting America requires sending federal agents (or the Marines) into the House Chamber to arrest traitors, then that’s what Trump should do. If it requires martial law, then we should have martial law.
I also think it’s NUTS to proceed with the 2020 election cycle until we know what is going on. We need to follow the rabbit hole down to the bottom and clean it out completely. Only then can we have any confidence in federal elections. That could take years.
Pelosi has unilaterally decided to appoint Schiff has an "independent counsel" who in turn has decided to appoint himself as the chief prosecutor conducting a one-sided grand jury. The thing is the independent counsel are attorneys who investigate and prosecute criminal activity in government. They hold people who make and implement laws accountable for their own criminal activity. Trump hasn't done anything "criminal" but Schiff HAS and he certainly is NOT unbiased. According to the legal dictionary, "Independent counsel who appear to be motivated by political or other bias may be dismissed.".
This entire effort is a sham in every way and we should expect/DEMAND the entire Senate to reject it - not just the Republicans. Those who refuse to do so - including the few Republican hold-outs - should be voted out and/or impeached themselves! This is the ULTIMATE in voter disenfranchisement.
David Eisenhower, Julie and Tricia Nixon...What must they be thinking?
You spelled “Treason” wrong. ;-)
You’re absolutely correct. The GOP senate should say ok we’ll let our top two guys look at it and decide if it’s worthy of further consideration. Just like the House did. Then return it and say...nope. Try again.
The Dems have put themselves in a lose-lose situation. I still say it’s going to fizzle out and with the coming indictments, it seems certain. IMO
Good question. At least Nixon didn’t fight the Kennedy win, which was stolen, and did the right thing by resigning.
There is no impeachment happening, just a Democrat clown show for the press.
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.