Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

4 Reasons Trumpís Impeachment Is The Weakest In U.S. History
The Federalist ^ | December 19, 2019 | Mollie Hemmingway

Posted on 12/19/2019 1:52:37 PM PST by Kaslin

President Donald Trump joined Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson in the club of impeached presidents Wednesday night. Like the other two, Trump will be acquitted by the Senate once the articles of impeachment are delivered.

The case for Trump’s impeachment is the weakest of the three. If we include Richard Nixon, who resigned on his way to impeachment, it’s the weakest of the four. Here’s why.

1. No Actual Crime

Previous impeachments at least had a crime. Andrew Johnson was the first U.S. president to be impeached. He faced 11 articles of impeachment, mostly built around his violation of the Tenure of Office Act of 1867. That act limited the power of presidents to fire employees in Senate-approved positions without the consent of the Senate. While the law was blatantly unconstitutional, Johnson did violate it by getting rid of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton.

Clinton was impeached for actual crimes that would get the rest of us in a whole lot of trouble. He was impeached for lying to a grand jury about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, false statements he’d made in an earlier deposition, and false statements he allowed his attorney to make about witness tampering. He was also impeached for obstructing justice in a case filed against him by encouraging Lewinsky to make a false statement and give false testimony, by hiding gifts he’d given to her, getting her a job in exchange for favorable testimony, attempted witness tampering with his secretary, and making false and misleading statements to jurors.

Nixon would have been impeached for obstructing an investigation into the unlawful break-in by his Committee to Re-Elect the President at the Watergate building and using the IRS and other agencies to violate others’ privacy.

By contrast, President Trump was not impeached for any recognizable crime. Critics of Trump note that no crime is necessary to impeach the president. While that’s true, it speaks to how weak the Democrats’ case against Trump is.

2. Punishing Trump for Exercising Constitutional Privileges

Trump is being impeached for abusing his power and for obstructing Congress. The first charge relates to complaints with how Trump handled foreign policy with Ukraine. In a friendly phone call with the Ukraine president, Trump asked for help investigating corruption issues in the country. Since some of the corruption touched on the family of Joe Biden, Democrats say Trump abused his power since Biden may be his 2020 election opponent.

Biden was the Obama administration’s point man in Ukraine when his son, Hunter, who had no expertise in the region or industry, was being paid $80,000 a month to sit on the board of an energy concern there. Setting aside that charge, the second charge is more troubling.

Democrats say that Trump’s decision to exercise his constitutional privilege to protect executive communication means he should be removed from office. That’s their second charge — obstruction of Congress. Many presidents have battled with Congress over their executive privilege and what it covers, but the idea that the debate is cause for impeachment is remarkably weak. If President Trump had defied a court order to turn over documents, that would make for a stronger case. But that hasn’t happened.

3. Bipartisan Opposition Instead of Bipartisan Support

Previous impeachments had bipartisan support. In Trump’s case, not a single Republican supported impeachment and several Democrats declined to support it. This is a remarkable turn of events from the time that impeachment first began to be lobbied for. The media and others in the resistance pushed impeachment within hours of Trump’s inauguration.

The initial plan was to spin up a special counsel that would deliver a report on collusion with Russia to steal the election. That dream fizzled with the inability to find a single American, much less anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign, who had done so. But at its onset, the plan allegedly had Republican support. Now, no Republicans are joining Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Jerry Nadler in their impeachment goals.

The plan was clearly to start with limited Republican support and grow from there. Instead, there was no growth in the ranks of Republican support. And while high percentages of Americans have told pollsters for months that they would like the Bad Orange Man impeached, there was no movement in those polls toward more support. Even more surprisingly, Trump’s approval ratings went up. This shows us that the bipartisan growth and momentum that was needed isn’t happening.

4. Failure to Do the Work

Previous impeachments and impeachment efforts required a great deal of work from congressional and other investigators. Some spent years investigating matters before bringing them to Congress.

In this case, impeachment was built entirely around a late July phone call with Ukraine’s president. The original impeachment effort was to say that the phone call violated campaign finance law. That charge morphed into claims of bribery, extortion, and obstruction of justice. By the time two articles of impeachment were drafted, it was clear that the case had lost focus.

After the vote, some Democrats suggested that the House could keep investigating the matter. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi herself signaled a lack of confidence in her members’ work when she said that the House might not even send the articles over to the Senate for a trial. She claimed that was because of how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell planned to run the trial, but he said he would use the same rules that were used in the Clinton trial.

House members also coordinated with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on how the Senate trial should go. He told television cameras that he would like to call witnesses to further investigate the underlying matter. This would only be necessary if the House didn’t bother to complete their investigation because they were rushing.

Democrats hope to tarnish Trump heading into 2020. While they have done their best, what they’ve mostly provided is the weakest impeachment case in U.S. history.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: corruption; couppeachment; demonratparty; demonrats; housedemonrats; hunterbiden; impeachmentinquiry; joebiden; molliehemingway; nancypiglosi; presidenttrump; ukraine

1 posted on 12/19/2019 1:52:37 PM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’ll say it again, it opens the door to every president being impeached on a whim.

We don’t like him, impeach.

We don’t like his policies, impeach.

His dog pooped on the White House lawn, impeach.

He had beef steak last night, impeach.

He did nothing wrong that they can point to, but they have trumped up charges that are ludicrous.

Ever president is subject to impeachment of this sort.

The Democrats aren’t smart enough to figure out that their fair haired criminals will be subject to this also.


2 posted on 12/19/2019 2:12:10 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Pledge: "...and to the Democracy for which it stands..." I give up. Use the democRat meme...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

The obstruction of congress article is particularly ridiculous. That’s the president’s job. AKA checks and balances


3 posted on 12/19/2019 2:32:55 PM PST by wny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I’m waiting for Trump to use his favorite adjective “FAKE” to apply to the impeachment.

“This is a FAKE impeachment!”

Somebody please pass this along to the President.


4 posted on 12/19/2019 2:32:58 PM PST by AlanGreenSpam (Obama: The First 'American IDOL' President - sponsored by Chicago NeoCom Thugs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wny

His big sin was defending himself. Oh my...


5 posted on 12/19/2019 2:39:34 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Pledge: "...and to the Democracy for which it stands..." I give up. Use the democRat meme...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AlanGreenSpam

Good one...


6 posted on 12/19/2019 2:39:57 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Pledge: "...and to the Democracy for which it stands..." I give up. Use the democRat meme...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Andrew Johnson was charged with an aactual crime, The crime was pursuant to an unConstitutional act passed by the Radical Republicans in Congress that made it a crime for him to fire a cabinet member. That is the same sort of “crime” that the Democrats are charging Trump with in that Congress is trying to assume the power of hiring and firing and of decision making over the Presidency. Congress has not passed any actual law this time, just made some unConstitutional assumptions. The Democrats are trying to make of the President a weak Prime Minister who works for Congress.


7 posted on 12/19/2019 2:46:28 PM PST by arthurus (V\|:::::l/-:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This is an impeachment looking for a crime.

There is no such thing as obstruction of congress. President Trump and his associates had stated that they were going to have their due process and let the courts decide about the issue of executive exemptions of having to testify.

That is what triggered the dems they demanded that he not have his due process and was obstructing their investigations. BS All they were asking for is the due process of our courts that is guaranteed to each and every citizen of our nation.

When the chicken shit bastards did not get their way they had a tantrum and made up charges that do not even exist in the legal system of our nation.

The dems also want to allow hearsay/gossip evidence into a legal trial. So the Dems value gossip.

The democrats want to exclude all testimony that Hunter Biden received huge payments and preferential treatment because of his fathers position of Vice President of the USA. This is a fact that can be proven with direct primary first hand witnesses, facts proven by bank records and other direct provable evidence. So the Democrats do not like supported and provable facts.

That brings us to where we are right now.

The dems support, depend on, and represent second and third hand gossip as being of the utmost importance while at the same time do every thing they can do to disregard, discard, ignore, and disallow primary knowledge provable, evidence based facts from being presented in this incident.

These people are cowards and slimy asshole liars.


8 posted on 12/19/2019 2:59:03 PM PST by oldenuff35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Glad to see someone mentioned Andrew Johnson.

The mass media and college professors don’t want to talk about that embarrassment.

The current impoopment was the second witch burning by Congress, not the first.


9 posted on 12/19/2019 3:18:46 PM PST by cgbg (The Democratic Party is morphing into the Donner Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: arthurus; cgbg

A SCOTUS decision in 1926 put a stake through the heart of Congress interfering with a President hiring and firing cabinet officers at will.

There would be no more attempts to impeach a President like what the Radical Republicans attempted against Andrew Johnson. A case BTW featured in Kennedy’s (ghostwritten) “Profiles in Courage”.

The SCOTUS case is Myers vs United States. I ran across it when I kept seeing freepers claim that “Trump can’t fire Jeff Sessions!! Obstruction! Congress! The Senate!”

That was all a load of manure. Myers gives Presidents, including Trump, sole authority over firing the AG. Or any other executive branch officer.


10 posted on 12/19/2019 3:40:31 PM PST by Pelham (Obama. Seditious conspiracy. Misprision of treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Impeachment has always been a political tool, rather than a legal tool.

All you need is votes.


11 posted on 12/19/2019 4:33:33 PM PST by karnage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson