Skip to main content

IMPEACHMENT: FOR EUROPEANS AND FOR AMERICANS WHO THINK THAT THEY KNOW BUT DON'T

Talk of the possibility of impeaching President Trump is in the news. As an expat living in France, I've had occasion to explain just what impeachment means and how it works to some of my European friends. For the curious among you, here's the down and dirty version.

There are two ways that the American Constitution provides for the removal from office of a duly elected, living President.

Amendment XXV of the Constitution was ratified about 50 years ago and cleans up a couple of lingering questions including the provision of a path for succession should a living President be unable to fulfill the duties of the office through illness or other circumstance. Although there are those who would declare Trump unfit under Amendment XXV, that's really not a serious possibility.

Impeachment, however, is a serious possibility these days. Written into the body of the Constitution is the following:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. 

Note the distinction between impeachment and conviction. Impeachment roughly corresponds to an indictment. The House of Representatives impeaches (indicts) through a majority vote and supplies the managers (prosecutors). The President (defendant) chooses his/her own counsel, not necessarily elected politicians. The Senate acts as the jury. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides. A two-thirds vote of  the Senators present is required for conviction. The only penalty for conviction is removal from office.

Note the listed causes for impeachment. Treason and bribery speak for themselves. But what is the definition of a high crime or misdemeanor? In simple, real world terms, the answer to that question is that high crimes or misdemeanors are whatever the House says that they are. The history of Presidential impeachments is instructive in this regard.

Two Presidents have been impeached. Democrat Andrew Jackson was impeached by a Republican Congress in an egregious display of partisanship, primarily because of Jackson's refusal to adhere to a law, later deemed unconstitutional, designed to limit his Presidential power. He was acquitted by one vote on three of eleven articles of impeachment. Following the third acquittal, his trial was adjourned. Democrat Bill Clinton was impeached by a Republican Congress for lying under oath concerning his sexual activity with an intern and for attempting to obstruct the investigation. Neither of the two articles of impeachment managed to gain a clear majority of Senators, much less two-thirds.

It would not be a stretch to say that both impeachments were politically motivated and not based on circumstances that the Founders had in mind. But they were, nonetheless, legitimate. They followed form. There's a saying in American jurisprudence: A good prosecutor can convince a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Although a President is not a ham sandwich, the point is valid when it comes to impeachment. The House, sitting as a grand jury, can indict for whatever reason that it chooses.

Contrary to popular belief, Richard Nixon was not impeached, much less convicted. After the House Judiciary Committee passed articles of impeachment, it was clear that the House as a whole would vote to impeach, But it was not certain initially that the Senate would convict. After release of a particularly incriminating recording and after the Saturday Night Massacre (when Nixon fired high-level Justice Department officials who would not order an end to investigations), conviction in the Senate became a virtual certainty. Nixon resigned.

Can Trump be impeached? Certainly. Will he be impeached? Right now, that's an open question. I personally believe that he is most likely to be impeached if he continues to order that House subpoenas for testimony and documents be ignored. If that continues after a Supreme Court ruling against him, he most definitely will be impeached. If impeached, would he be convicted? Under that circumstance, defiance of a Supreme Court ruling, I have to believe that he will be. But we're not there yet. Like Speaker of the House Pelosi, my inclination is to go slowly and see if Trump obliges by putting the noose around his own neck.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

GRAND CAFE OCCITAN: RESTAURANT REVIEW

  We made our way to a new restaurant the other day, up toward the hills past La Liviniere in the small town of Felines-Minervois. None of our party had been there before, but a friend had visited and said that she'd enjoyed it. She's a vegetarian. First clue. Now don't get me wrong. I have no gripe with those who choose to go meatless. I understand the environmental concerns and I understand the horrors of factory farming. But I also understand that form follows function in the design of tools, in the design of appliances, and in the design of human teeth. Our incisors and canines did not develop over the course of hundreds of thousands of years to rend the flesh of a fresh-caught broccoli. We are omnivores by design, Darwinian design. And I enjoy eating omni. Enough preamble... I never went inside the Grand Cafe Occitan. A young lady who would be our server met us at the front door of the nicely pointed old stone house, leading us to a pebble-covered courtyard on the side

THINKING OUT LOUD...

GRACE SLICK, BREXIT AGAIN, SELF CHECKOUT, AND MORE: #18

    GRACE SLICK I just listened again to Volunteers , the last Jefferson Airplane album with the 'classic' lineup. 1969. Perfect. Sometimes sloppy. Sometimes over dramatic. But perfect. And Grace Slick. Grace. Slick. Perfect. BREXIT & CONSERVATISM Except for the 30% or so who've drunk the Kool-Aid, can we all agree that Brexit is not working out as advertised? And that the Republican Party in the USofA has sold its soul to a cadre of authoritarians who think they are the true small-d-democrats but who don't want everybody to have a vote and won't abide by a vote that they don't like? How did it happen that, in the name of political conservatism, two countries put into power incompetent leaders financed by greedy elites? And I just read that Michael Gove thinks that Liz Truss is toast because her agenda has been shredded. Whose agenda has been shredded more thoroughly than Gove’s and why would any thinking person be interested in his opinions except to liste