Since the conclusion of the 2016 presidential election, there has been a constant cry from the Left for the impeachment of Donald Trump. They perceive him as illegitimate, a man who stole the election from Hillary Clinton with the help of Russian hackers. With the release of the Mueller Report and the exoneration of Donald Trump in questions of collusion, Democrats in Congress have moved on. Now, they discuss impeachment centered around a perceived obstruction of justice and the stonewalling of congressional requests for records by the Trump White House. None of these matters, as of yet, are worthy of impeachment. That being said, Donald J. Trump deserves to be impeached.
To the Republican loyalists out there shaking their fists at the screen, let me explain what I mean by impeachment. The process of impeaching the President is two-fold. The first step, the step I am in favor of, is the House of Representatives voting on articles of impeachment. The constitution defines these articles as “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”, a definition open to interpretation by the House. This is purposely vague because the Founders envisioned impeachment as a semi-common occurrence. They expected Congress to push back against a President that has overstepped his bounds. Congress is the supreme branch of government, and thus should be given these powers.
This definition of impeachment includes unconstitutional behavior, which every President since Franklin Delano Roosevelt can be accused of, Trump included. Declaring a national emergency (a questionably constitutional law in itself) to steal money from the Pentagon to build his pet project after Congress debated and found funding for the wall unnecessary is blatantly unconstitutional and warrants impeachment. Conservatives have long been outraged at government overstepping constitutional bounds, and this should be no exception. If we believed Bill Clinton or Barack Obama deserved impeachment then this belief necessarily leads to us being in favor of impeaching Trump, even if he has an (R) next to his name.
However, this does not necessarily mean that the President should be convicted. Conviction and removal from office is a bold step, a step Congress should only take when the President refuses to change his position, or end his unlawful or unconstitutional behavior. The Senate rightfully acquitted Bill Clinton because his personal flaws did not deserve removal from office. Andrew Johnson’s acquittal was also proper; his impeachment was political in nature, as the law he was violating was clearly unconstitutional. Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to build a wall on the southern border does not warrant removal. The courts can and probably will stop construction. The founders designed impeachment to be a stain on a person’s record. Conviction is a permanent solution to the problems an impeached President continues to cause.
Intellectual honesty, and a principled stand in favor of the Constitution, are supposed to be marks of the conservative movement. This honesty, and our principles, are easy to uphold when it is the other side violating them. The difficult choices are made when it is our own allies who break these principles. Let us stand up for the Constitution, and for the Founding principles which make this country great. Let us impeach Donald J. Trump.
Editor’s Note: I’m often asked whether I support impeachment for Donald Trump. My response, if I’m speaking to someone who can handle an honest answer, is usually yes. But that answer is quickly followed up with the assertion that nearly every president of the 20th Century deserved to be impeached, as Scott mentions. The Article I impeachment powers are yet another check and balance of the federalist system that has been used far too infrequently in the history of our Republic. To use those powers as a heightened censure upon a president operating outside his constitutional authority, which would create a censure with actual consequences should the president not take notice, would be a good development.
-Justin
- I Was Wrong, Burn It Down - June 25, 2020
- An Open Letter to #ConservativesForBiden - May 7, 2020
- The Danger of Incorporation Doctrine - May 4, 2020
Do you think Trump has violated the Emoluments Clause, & if yes, is this an impeachable offense?
I actually don’t know enough about the current case against Trump in this regard to give you a good answer. However, if it’s found that he directly told the Air Force to stay at his hotel I think that warrants impeachment, and is probably conviction-worthy
I expect the topic will come up over the course of the impeachment hearings.
As do I. It will be interesting to see just what reasons they use, if they go forward with impeachment.
I am not sure if my comment got through the first time, so here goes again:
I am not educated enough on the Emoluments Clause to give you a straight answer; however, from what I gather and what has been revealed in the last couple weeks, if it is found out that Trump explicitly told the Air Force to stay at his hotel, then that is definite cause for impeachment, and probably for conviction.
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
If this is what you are speaking of, then no.