House Judiciary Releases Report On Constitutional Grounds of Impeachment

Townhall.com ^ | December 7, 2019 | Bronson Stocking

[Kaslin]

Democrats have finally admitted the genius of our founding fathers, a big break from their usual descriptions of them as white supremacists. In a new report, titled Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment, released Saturday, the majority staff on the House Judiciary Committee has attempted to expand the definition of what constitutes an impeachable offense so that seemingly any president throughout America's history would now be subject to impeachment.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler felt the need to write a forward attempting to explain why such a report is needed in the first place. While Nadler admits that other reports have already been produced, he quickly adds that recently, "however, legal scholars and historians have undertaken a substantial study of the subject," and while the "earlier reports remain useful points of reference," they "no longer reflect the best available learning on questions relating to presidential impeachment. Further, they do not address several issues of constitutional law with particular relevance to the ongoing impeachment inquiry respecting President Donald J. Trump."

In other words, what the founders and everyone else previously thought constituted an impeachable offense was a good start, but Democrats are going to take it a bit further. "There are at least as many ways to abuse power as there are powers vested in the President," the report declares. "It would be an exercise in futility to attempt a list of every abuse of power constituting high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” This is an admission that the Democrats can't specify exactly what the president did that was impeachable. 

"The Framers were careful students of history and knew that threats to democracy can take many forms," the report warns. "They feared would-be monarchs, but also warned against fake populists, charismatic demagogues, and corrupt kleptocrats." Why bring Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren into this? 

The report further notes the "Framers celebrated civic virtue and love of country; they wrote rules to ensure officials would not use public power for private gain." Like when a Ukranian energy company pays the son of the vice president's $50,000 to buy influence from his father?

After pretending to care about Democracy, the report then concludes that Americans simply cannot be trusted to take action in the next election. "No President is entitled to persist in office after committing 'high Crimes and Misdemeanors,' and no one who voted for him in the last election is entitled to expect he will do so. Where the President's misconduct is aimed at corrupting elections, relying on elections to solve the problem is no safeguard at all."

So this new report is just the Democrats' latest attempt to overturn the will of the American people in the 2016 election. When Democrats start wrapping themselves in the flag and start pretending to acknowledge the genius of our founding fathers, you can be sure the Democrats are planning to do something very unAmerican. 

[onona]

the report then concludes that Americans simply cannot be trusted to take action in the next election.

"No President is entitled to persist in office after committing 'high Crimes and Misdemeanors,' and no one who voted for him in the last election is entitled to expect he will do so.

Where the President's misconduct is aimed at corrupting elections, relying on elections to solve the problem is no safeguard at all."

Them's fightin words.

[Libloather]

This is an admission that the Democrats can't specify exactly what the president did that was impeachable.

RATS are just making it all up. Really bad time to start grasping at straws. But, they aren't called extremists for nuthin'.

[Redwood71]

“The Framers were careful students of history and knew that threats to democracy can take many forms,” the report warns.”

Does that include trying to sway an election with nothing more than trumped up publicity from an impeachment hearing? Didn’t the Russians do that also and it was considered wrong?

rwood