What constitutes an impeachable offense: don't fall for the R's or MSM's nonsense

[DonaldsRump]

Last edited Sun Jul 28, 2019, 01:10 PM - Edit history (3)

As seems clear, we are moving toward the impeachment of Trump. As the House goes forward, keep in mind the meaning of what constitutes an impeachable offense by a sitting US President. While the US Constitution references "treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors", it is VERY clear that an impeachable offense does NOT mean a crime. Rather, it means some kind of abuse of power against the state.

We will surely see the argument made by Republicans that only an indictable felony by Trump rises to the level of an impeachable offense. Do not fall for this argument. There is ample precedent that an impeachable offense does not have to be a federal felony or misdemeanor.

That also explains, to potentially a large degree, Mueller's reticence at being dragged into discussing impeachment at the two hearings last week. He is not the House's investigator; he was a criminal prosecutor, and there are many, many things which can constitute an impeachable offense that don't have to be a chargeable felony or misdemeanor. It is emphatically the province of the House, not the Judiciary and not underlings under the Executive Branch, like the DOJ, a US Attorney, or the Special Counsel. It is the House, and only the House.

As one example, take a look at this from the 1974 House Judiciary Committee Staff, when considering impeaching Richard Nixon https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/1974ImpeachmentInquiryReport.pdf . It goes into great detail as to the meaning of "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

The HJC adopted three articles of impeachment against Nixon, one of which was for "abuse of power", which is not a felony under the US Code, and another of which was contempt of Congress because Nixon failed to comply with providing documents and tapes required by House subpoenas. How different is Nixon's behavior from Trump's?

Keep this mind in the coming days. As we all know, the Republicans will find all sorts of reasons to defend Trump, even though he is consorting with the enemy. They will say "Mueller's report did not state that Trump could be indicted." Don't fall for it for a second.

B/t/w, guess who was on the staff of the HJC in 1974?: a young lawyer fresh out of law school named Hillary Rodham, whom we eventually came to know and love as Hillary Rodham Clinton: https://history.house.gov/People/detail/11751

What goes around, comes around.

[Wellstone ruled]

1. I guess we all forget how

Bohner and Company threaten to Impeach Obama because they could. How we forget how that threat hung in the air for 8 years.

How short our memories of Congressman Brady pulling the Tax Returns of folks working at the IRS over some cockamamie conspiracy coming from the mental Midgets at fox noise and Infowars.

[onecaliberal]

2. Asking a hostile foreign government for assistance to steal an election is impeachable every day of

The week.

[Brother Buzz]

3. What constitutes an impeachable offense? Congressman Gerald Ford's 1970 definition is pretty damn...

succinct, Baby

"An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." - Congressman Gerald Ford, April 1970

[DonaldsRump]

5. Totally agree

Even though Gerald Ford went to Yale Law School, he was not the brightest bulb in the ceiling. He made that comment in the context of the House's very lame attempt to impeach Justice Abe Fortas, if I recall correctly.

The best play for the House is to expose the huge amount of sh*t that Trump has done, before and after taking the office. We know it's nearly impossible for the Republican-controlled Senate to convict Trump if (when?) the House impeaches him. However, it really doesn't matter. What Trump did, has done, and is doing is so egregious, there is no other option. I actually think that even a few deplorables will change their tune when they find out what the Trump "maladministration" has done and is doing.

I don't think the Founding "Fathers" could have ever comprehended that the US would have someone as awful as Trump and his Republican enablers...but maybe they did.

Without question, the House should impeach.

[ElementaryPenguin]

4. The term "high crimes and misdemeanors" was widely used in the 18th Century...

And understood at the time of the writing of the Constitution to mean "an egregious misuse of power."

(according to a celebrated historical scholar I saw recently appear on MSNBC)


Obviously, Trump is guilty of this in more ways than one can even count.

[DonaldsRump]

6. I added a section to my OP linking the Mueller Report to the concept of impeachable offense

Am also hoping to make sure as many DU'ers see this as possible over the coming days.

This was Nixon's big defense by the HJC Republicans in 1974: he did not commit a crime or misdemeanor. It is a TOTAL red herring, and we shouldn't be deceived by it.