Another impeachment of Donald Trump is now underway. If it weren’t so serious, one would suspect a political satirist was writing and having others perform a farce.
First and foremost, those deluded Democrats who followed Nancy Pelosi’s lead and voted the one article of impeachment do not realize, or do not want to acknowledge, how ludicrous the charge of ‘inciting’ an insurrection is. Such an action is, by definition an attempt to overthrow a government, by violence and force of arms.
So far, all that has been shown is that a bunch of loonies, mostly supporters of Trump, marched to the Capitol with the purpose of protesting the results of the 2020 election. The President, for his part, was not on the scene, but he did make a speech some 1.4 miles from the place where the violence took place. Included in that speech was his urging those who listened to ‘peacefully and patriotically’ protest. It was a vintage Trump rally, but those present were much far away and too late to the action to be a large part of what was called a riot.
Unfortunately, four protesters and one Capitol police office died, though the exact reason for the officer’s death has not been released. Certainly he did not die of a fire extinguisher hitting him, as some on the loony left have asserted. Such results were never what was wanted nor urged by the President on January 6.
Did the protesters have any logical reason to march on the Capitol? The answer is that they did, as evidence of voter fraud were many, with several who witnessed such swore under penalty of perjury that they saw such. Marches have been held on much flimsier reasons. This march was not illegitimate by any standard for modern rallies. To hold Trump and his supporters to a higher standard of conduct is disingenuous at best, and demagoguery at worst. Democrats, who turned a blind eye to the violence, destruction and rioting in the summer of 2020 have simply shown that double standard again and again.
To return to the impeachment then, we must weigh in on its legitimacy. The Constitution uses this process as a guard against the most egregious of actions of the officials who can be subject to it. Charges are, as you are well aware, voted on by the House of Representatives, and can be filed with a simple majority. Obviously, this then becomes a political cudgel to use against an unpopular member of an opposing party.
Charges, according to the Founding Fathers, should only be for ‘treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. And the ‘punishment’ is simply removal from the office the offender holds. This means that the minute Donald Trump exited the Presidency, at 12:01 pm EST on January 20th, he no longer held office; he became private citizen Donald Trump. No matter how serious his offenses, the Constitutional process of impeachment became moot. He cannot be removed from an office he no longer holds.
One Democrat tried to justify doing this to Trump by using an example from Great Britain, an occurrence in the 18th century. One of the reasons we had a Revolutionary War was to set up our own rules and laws; such an example should not have had the cost spent on ink and paper to posit.
Then there is the other item of unconstitutionality to consider. A ‘legal’ action taken in English and British history was the Bill of Attainder. A Bill of Attainder, in its simplest terms, is a process whereby an elected body votes a person (or class of persons) guilty of crimes and exacts punishment for those crimes. It was used as a weapon against political rivals, especially when a change in government or royal house took place.
Our founding fathers took not of this odious practice and specifically prohibited it in the Constitution. Yet that is what the Democrats are trying to do with Trump. He had no due process in the House; that body simply voted to charge him with a ‘crime’ and the Senate will now vote, mostly along partisan lines, whether or not he is guilty.
Our system of jurisprudence allows for conviction of felony only when guilt is proven beyond ‘a reasonable doubt’, and after a defense has been given every opportunity to contest the allegations. Yet no witnesses will be called in the Senate trial, and the judge is one of the most partisan Democrats in that body. In addition, before a single minute of the ‘trial’ was held, fifty of the jurors already declared Trump guilty!
Based on those two points alone, this has become a mockery of our system of government. Trump cannot be removed from office, and any vote will become a Bill of Attainder, if successful.
We are not a banana republic, but some aspects of this farce resemble such governments. We are better than that. Democrats want to humiliate and degrade Trump and make sure he never again attains any power. But for those who claim to defend democracy by participating in this action, a better way to keep Trump a private citizen is at the ballot box. But they are afraid that 74 million plus who voted for him in November might just want to see the ‘orange man’ come back.
When the vote is taken, there is virtually no chance 2/3 of the Senate will vote to convict. We are seeing wasted time, wasted effort, and wasted resources being used for a nothing outcome. When the 2022 election is over, perhaps some of the actors in this effort will regret what they have not accomplished.