Topic category: Constitution/Constitutional Crises
The Impeachment of President Trump is the Real Abuse of Power
President Trump believes that he should have received enough electoral votes to be reelected and that he was impeached because his political enemies want to disqualify him from running again for President and the Democrat majority in the House of Representatives had the votes to impeach.
That impeachment is an egregious abuse of the impeachment power.
President Trump was impeached for allegedly inciting an insurrection, so a look back at the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican President of the United States, is in order.
Andrew Johnson, a Tennessee Democrat, had joined with Lincoln on a national unity ticket and succeeded to the Presidency upon the assassination of Lincoln.
The so-called Radical Republicans were not pleased with Johnson and succeeded in impeaching him, but, by one vote, not in having him removed from office.
Essentially the Radical Republicans tried to criminal political differences.
All twelve Democrat Senators voted to acquit and were joined by seven Republican Senators, including Senator James Grimes.
Grimes explained that "[h]owever widely...[he]...differ[ed] with...Presidenrt [Johnson] and however deeply [he]...regretted...the differences between [the President] and the Congress," he could not "suffer [his] judgment of the law governing [the] case to be influenced by political considerations."
Grimes further explained that in voting whether or not to convict he was "acting in a judicial capacity, under conditions whose binding obligation can hardly be exceeded," and he felt constrained to "act according to the best of [his] ability and judgment."
Grimes described his duty this way: "If..the President is guilty, I must say so; if...the President is not guilty, I must say so."
To Grimes, President Johnson's "character as a statesman, his relations to political parties, his conduct as a citizen, his efforts at reconstruction, the exercise of his pardoning power, the character of his appointment, and the influences under which they were made" were "not before him."
How many Democrat Senators will do the same if the impeachment of President Trump for allegedly inciting an insurrection is tried after President Trump is out of office on January 20, 2021?
I think that the same number of Democrat Senators who voted to convict the impeached Democrat Presidents (Johnson and Bill Clinton) will vote to acquit former Republican President Trump if there is such a vote: zero.
I hope that I am wrong about that, but since Democrat Senator John Tester of Montana indicated that he wants to punch President Trump in the face and President-elect expressed his yearning to take President Trump behind the gym and beat him, I wonder if even one Democrat Senator would dare to prioritize the rule of law over political pandering.
Insurrection is "a violent uprising against an authority or government."
Perhaps a case can be made against Rudy Giuliani for calling for trial by combat, but President Trump expressly called for peaceful protest and he is entitled under the First Amendment to express his opinions on vote fraud.
Vote fraud hardly began in 2020. For example, in "Justice and Vote Fraud," published on October 27, 2008 in The Wall Street Journal, it was stated: "Vote fraud is real and can affect elections. In 2001, the Palm Beach Post reported that more than 5,600 people who voted in Florida in the 2000 Presidential election had names and data that perfectly matched a statewide list of suspected felons who were barred from voting. Florida was decided by about 500 votes."
In 2000, CBS (Dan Rather) called Florida for Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore before the polls had closed in the predominantly Republican Florida Panhandle. Surely that fake news suppressed the Florida Panhandle vote, and without it the winning margin of Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush would have been greater, not narrower.
Media bias at work or a good faith mistake?
There was not that type of fake news on Election Day 2020, but there were widely reported suppression polls before that day, or were pollsters simply unfit?
Justice Robert Jackson eloquently stated that the Supreme Court is not final because it is infallible; it is infallible because it is final.
The Supreme Court actually is not infallible, of course, and neither are state certifications, particularly the ones that President Trump disputes. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court gave finality to state certifications, making the stealing of a state's electoral votes an issue outside the scope of Supreme Court review for Electoral College purposes.
Michael J. Gaynor
Biography - Michael J. Gaynor
Gaynor's email address is firstname.lastname@example.org.