The Eve of Impeachment

"What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people."
-Donald J. Trump, Jan. 20, 2017

This quotation is especially significant on this Eve of Impeachment, an impeachment being sought by those who themselves would take all control from the people.

I had not intended to write about this whole impeachment debacle, first because there is more than enough being written by others and second because to give time to this sham seems somehow wrong.  But the quotation reminded me that we the people should never give up our vigilance, and certainly not when there is a concerted effort to take away our voices and our power.

So, herein I will first look as some of the context surrounding this “impeachment” and then at the constitution itself, both of which I think argue for a quick dismissal. 

As the rhetoric ramps up on this Eve of Impeachment, I think that anyone who fairly, critically, and objectively looks at the situation can agree upon certain things.

First, President Trump’s style is completely different than that of his predecessor as well as different from most smooth-talking politicians.  The President tweets, he uses common and sometimes gruff language, he doesn’t beat around the bush, but instead tells it like it is.  This seems to offend many, especially those whose style is more refined (or who would like to think that they or their style are more refined).

Second, the President’s policies are also different from those of the previous administration and of today’s Democrats.  Yet, the people elected Donald Trump, and with him his policies.  With a change in policy comes a change in personnel; the president always has a right to remove people appointed by a different administration and bring in his own people.  That includes removing long term bureaucrats, especially those who have come to believe that they, not the people’s elected officials, should be running things.  The Democrats like to latch onto such personnel changes as some sort of evidence of abuse of power, when they are simply a lawful change in policy, one that the people chose by their vote.

Third, the Democrats have been trying to remove the President from office since just minutes after his inauguration, minutes after he uttered the above quoted words.  They have been searching and searching to find something, anything, that would allow them to overturn the results of the election.  We have had name-calling, we had 2 years of the Russian investigation that despite having shown that it was a big nothing the Democrats continue to assert as some sort of wrongdoing by the President.  We have had attempts to thwart every policy decision and appointment by the President with which the Democrats disagree.  

We then had a “whistle-blower” who was colluding with Adam Schiff or other Democrats who gave us a phone conversation that turned out to simply be a request to investigate some possible misconduct during the past administration that may have involved a member of that administration who is now a candidate in the Democratic presidential primary.  From that phone call we had Adam Schiff conduct secret hearings from which he revealed only select portions of testimony, and during which Republicans were not allowed to question witnesses or present their own witnesses or present their side of the case.  Despite their one-sided unfairness, these hearings again produced no evidence of a crime.  Nonetheless, the Democrats, through their own admission, need to impeach the President or, they fear, he will be re-elected.

Fourth, many of the Democrats, in their unremitting quest for power which marches hand in hand with their quest to remove President Trump, have shown a deep disregard for our Constitution and its protections.  The most recent example of this is Nancy Pelosi’s statements that essentially assert that the President must prove his innocence.  Apparently, she doesn’t understand this country’s most basic concept of innocent until proven guilty.  In a trial, which is essentially what impeachment is, the prosecution (here the House) must make a basic case.  If no such case is made, the case will be dismissed.  This is what should actually happen here: because the articles of impeachment presented by the House do not make a case it is a waste of time and taxpayer money to not dismiss this entire frivolity.

If a case goes forward, both sides will present their evidence and the prosecution must prove their case beyond other, reasonable understandings of the evidence.  Until such time the defendant is innocent; asking a defendant to prove his innocence is like asking someone when they stopped beating their wife which requires them to essentially prove they never beat their wife to begin with. (Or, to use a more topical example from the last Democrat debate, it is like asking candidate Warren what she said when Bernie Sanders said a woman can’t be president.  That question, asked by CNN, includes the assumption that Sanders is guilty of that statement, something which he denies, and which has not been proven, but of which he is now expected to prove his innocence). 

The Democrat method of late is always to label, call names, accuse, and then demand that the one accused find a way to prove they are innocent of the charges, charges that often have no supportive evidence. One of their most egregious uses of this tactic was the Kavanaugh hearing, but we see it every day in their accusations against the President, his staff, his supporters, and the everyday people with whom the Democrats disagree as they try to silence and destroy any opposition.

Yes, beyond our Constitutional rights to a fair trial and other judicial protections, the Democrats are also eager to ignore our First Amendment rights to freedoms of speech, assembly, and religion.  They are just as eager to ignore and deny Second Amendment rights.  They consider as invalid an election by the process set forth in the Constitution using the Electoral College.  They talk about “stacking” the Supreme Court so as to make it a partisan political branch.  And, of course, they forgo their oaths to the Constitution and their duty to listen to and speak for their constituents rather than simply pursuing their personal power agendas.

With such a complete disregard of our Constitution and our governmental structures, the oath that was taken last week by senators to conduct a fair trial seems almost a joke.  If the Democrats hold such disdain for our government then what meaning did that oath have for them?  The clear answer is: Nothing. Their oath is to their quest to destroy the President and either remove him from office or so weaken him that he will either not be re-elected or, if he is, he will be able to do nothing.   Despite their pretense that this is a solemn occurrence that they are taking seriously, we see Democrats joking, laughing with glee, handing out golden pens, and delighting in saying that regardless of the outcome, the President will be forever impeached and hence his name forever blackened.  It’s like they want to put an asterisk by his name to say he wasn’t really legitimate.  And their reason is simply this:  because they hate him.

So, the lawyers will argue about what is impeachable.  The senators will argue about rules.  The media will be a bit histrionic about everything, with a clear bias against the President.  We know the Democrats have no qualms about lying (for example Adam Schiff putting a false record of the phone call into the house record).  Democrats will try to prolong this since the longer it stays before the public, the more it is likely to hurt the President; first, because when people hear things repeated over and over they tend to begin to believe them whether or not they are true; and, second because focus on this keeps the President from focusing on the more important things like continuing to grow our economy, eliminating threats to our country, foreign policy, etc. while giving Democrats cover for doing none of the people’s work.

In the end, this is all quite simple, especially if we begin by looking at the Constitution.  Article 2 has 4 sections which cover the duties of the executive branch as well as impeachment.  In part, that article states as follows:

               Sec. 1: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” [The remainder of this section explains qualifications, election, term, etc as well as the President’s oath of office: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

               Sec. 2:  This section sets fort the powers of the president and includes that he is the Commander in Chief of the military, explains his power to grant reprieves and pardons, and his treaty making powers.

               Sec. 3:  This explains the president’s duties to inform Congress via the State of the Union address, to receive ambassadors and other state officials and his duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.”

               Sec. 4:   “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.”

There are no detailed explanations of the impeachable crimes, but, in Article 3 which deals with judicial powers, immediately following a paragraph that mentions form of trials, including impeachment, Section 3 defines treason: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”  Using typical canons of statutory construction, one can reasonably assume that the other “crimes and misdemeanors” would be of equivalent gravity. 

So, with this legal background and context, I can see no way that the House’s articles of impeachment should not simply be dismissed.  There is no crime alleged and no evidence of any impeachable crime.

The first charge is “Abuse of Power”  Historically, it has been made clear that “abuse of power” alone is not an impeachable offense, especially since the out of power party regularly accuses the in power party and president of abuse of power when it carries out policies that the out of power party does not agree with.  If abuse of power is impeachable, then every president will face political impeachment.

The President had a legitimate reason to ask for an investigation into Hunter Biden and Burisma.  Such investigation involved possible misdeeds by members of the previous administration.  That the vice-president of that administration happens to be a current Democrat candidate for president does not mean that those misdeeds should not be investigated, even if such investigation might in some way affect that candidate’s current campaign.  The investigation was into Ukrainian corruption that may implicate the previous administration and that is a legitimate act if not a duty for the current president to investigate. 

The President had a right and a duty to call for an investigation, and to withhold distribution of monies to Ukraine until he was assured that the known corruption in that country was being dealt with.  He also had the power to conduct his negotiations and discussions with that country in his style and with the people that he chose.  It was not an abuse of power to remove bureaucrats and other public servants whom he felt were not effective in carrying out his polices.  There is no actual evidence, other than opinion and innuendo, that what the president did or said in regard to Ukraine was anything but legitimate.

Actually, if anyone is obviously doing something to affect a presidential election it is the Democrat Senators who are also candidates for president who will sit in judgement of their opponent.  Certainly, the outcome of the impeachment trial will have a bearing on their candidacy; they have a personal stake in this.  When a judge has a personal interest in some aspect of a case, he or she will recuse from hearing and deciding the case so as to avoid even the appearance of bias.  One should expect no less from the Democrat senator-candidates.  Yet, that expectation will not be met and is simply another demonstration of the fact that this impeachment is not about fairness but about the Democrats attacking their opponent for political purposes, not for the good of the country.

As to the second article of impeachment, “Obstruction of Congress,” the mere allegations of this article only go to prove the Democrats’ utter disregard for our legal system.  The essence of the allegation is that the executive branch did not comply with subpoenas and other information or testimony requests from the House.  However, what this ignores is the right to question the validity of subpoenas and other requests in a court of law – something which the President and others were in the process of doing when the Democrat House decided to impeach.   

The Democrats were unwilling to let the judicial process take its course and determine what information the President was required to provide. Only once the judiciary had rendered final opinions, including all appeals, would they then possibly be able to claim abuse if the President did not abide by those decisions.  But, in their rush of hatred and desire for removal, the Democrats were unwilling to wait.  Their disregard for our justice system was simply part of the means justifying their political end.

So, I really see nothing here and, in my opinion, this should simply be dismissed.  It will not be, because everyone will be afraid that to do so would be portrayed by the Democrats and their Mainstream Media as some sort of cover-up.  Instead, the Democrats will try to drag this out and waste more and more of the taxpayer money trying to dig for something else to use against the President and silence the voice of the people.  For, in the Democrat view, it is they who should control the people. 

On this Eve of Impeachment, I hope the people will not be fooled.  I hope they will see the Democrats for what they are:  disaffected and power hungry with a hatred so strong that they are willing to dismantle our Constitution and the core principles of our democracy in order to assuage it. 

What the Kavanaugh Hearings Tell Us About America

Looking at the Kavanaugh nomination circus, anyone who has half a brain knows the process is broken, though sadly many choose not to see what they know.  So, what does this tell us – not only about the Kavanaugh hearings, but about America itself?  Let me suggest a few things.

We are losing America as we know it.   The original motto of our Country, adopted by act of Congress, in 1782, is “E pluribus Unum.”  That means “From many, one.”  Even though changed to "In God we trust" in 1956, "e pluribus unum" has been for 200+ years a perfect description of our country:  many diverse people with diverse views come together under one rule of law, set forth in the Constitution.  That Constitution’s guidelines allow us to hold our individual beliefs yet bind us together as one people who believe in liberty and justice for all.  It sets forth principles of due process which provide for fair and equal treatment and which are essential for any form of democracy.   Because we held our Constitution and the rule of law in high esteem, we were able to disagree, sometimes heatedly, about policy and actions of the country while at the same time all believing in and hoping for the success and vitality of our democracy and our country.

We have lost this.  With the rise of identity politics we have devolved into tribes, each concerned primarily with their own interests and not with the good of the country or of the individuals who make up one or another tribe.  We have become willing to ignore the rule of law and the Constitution as tribe fights against tribe.

The Kavanaugh hearing has become about women and the MeToo movement.  Dr. Ford has lost her individual identity to become simply a representative of the tribe of MeToo women.  That tribe seems to be at war with the tribe of white, conservative men as represented by Judge Kavanaugh, or simply the tribe of non-activist judges that one would anticipate a non-liberal president to appoint. 

Dr. Ford is not all women; she is one woman, one individual and this is one alleged event.  This is not a trial of all women vs. all men.  Yet that is what it seems to have become.  And, in so becoming we have thrown out the core democratic principles of due process.  Now, rather than evidence, what matters is who puts on the best show – who is the most “compelling” witness, who cries or does not cry, who is the most sympathetic.  We ask “should a man be brought to tears by what he claims is an unfounded allegation?”  Does that mean he is weak?  What we are doing is painting all men with one brush, not seeing each person as the individual he or she is.  We are one tribe against another.

We see the rise of tribes playing out in our elections as well.  We are told to vote for someone because they are a woman or a Native American or a Black or an Hispanic or an Immigrant or a Republican or a Democrat or a veteran or a Muslim or – the list goes on.  We no longer look for the candidate who is best for America, but the one who will represent the tribe that we may happen to favor.  Similarly, in the Kavanaugh nomination, we have forgotten about the Constitution and the qualifications of a Justice.  It has become nothing more than a battle for tribal power.

Looking at the Kavanaugh hearings, we should be alarmed by how little the Constitution means to so many.  We should be alarmed at how the media, rather than present facts objectively and fully to the people, participate as propaganda machines for one or another tribal interest.  It has almost become a game – whom do you believe?   It is little more than a reality show; I’m surprised they haven’t asked people to call in with their judgment – text 1 for Kavanaugh, 2 for Ford.  This is not justice, this is not due process, this is not representative of what the Constitution and this Country stand for.

The Kavanaugh circus, which has turned into a Show Trial and which ignores the rule of law demonstrates how easily we are able to ignore the Constitution.  This ignoring of process began when the Democrats sat on Dr. Ford’s allegation when they could have brought it forth in closed session during the original hearing.  The Democrats chose not to do so, but instead held it as a weapon, meanwhile finding a lawyer and Democrat operative to advise Ford.  Only when it seemed that Kavanaugh would be confirmed did the Democrats bring the allegation forward – not for Ford, but as a weapon against Kavanaugh.  At that point I wish Sen. Grassley had said, “too bad, too late, hearing closed.  Go bring your allegation in court.”  But he did not.  Because of fear of the MeToo coalition he put the rules aside and reopened the hearing.  Then, when the Democrats weren’t yet ready to present Ford we had delay upon delay upon delay as hearing deadlines came and went for things like her “fear of flying” which we learned from her own testimony is bogus.  Her lawyers wouldn’t agree to the committee's offer to come to Dr. Ford when they were under the impression she feared flying, but again, from Ford’s testimony it appears she was never told this was a possibility.  This all reeks of stall tactics not for justice or concern for Dr. Ford, but as part of the attack on Judge Kavanaugh and the tribe he represents, a tribe which has been declared the enemy of the Democrats.

This ease with which we ignore the rule of law that once held us together sets a very dangerous precedent.  In the Kavanaugh circus we have thrown out the rules because of fear of various tribal interests and emotional hysteria.  There is no due process for either party and the Constitution and rule of law have become a casualty as people justify the use of any means necessary to achieve their end goal of victory for their tribe.   This has become an example of mob rule, not rule of law.  In this case, by following the precedent that the rules don't matter, the vote on Kavanaugh could be delayed forever as the Kavanaugh opponents parade out allegation after allegation and demand investigation after investigation. Like Stalin's Beria, they have their victim, they will continue to search for the crime.  This case is especially troubling because of the way the Democrats have used Ford, demonstrating that they care less about the individual and her anguish than about their own political power.

But, beyond this case, we are seeing a precedent where we are willing to ignore the rule of law – the constitution – to serve political ends.  If we are willing to do that here, then really that document, the Constitution, that binds us all together with rights and responsibilities that apply to all, has lost its meaning.  And when it has lost its meaning then we as a country have lost our meaning – we are no longer one people, but a bunch of tribes each fighting for our own interests. 

This crisis of America did not begin with the Kavanaugh hearing.  It has been building for years – years long before Donald Trump even became a politician.  It is fueled by lack of education about the fundamentals of our government and objective history of our country and its place in the world.  It is fueled by a media that cares less about truth than about ratings and that is more than willing to become a propaganda machine for one or another group.  And, it is boosted by the use of identity politics that raise a tribal identity over the individual and then foment the hatred of one tribe against another.

America is now, however, at a true and important crossroad.  Will we continue on the path of tribalism, or will we stand against it and for the unified America that holds the Constitution and the rule of law as its unifying and guiding principle?  Will we assume that all people of a particular tribe think and act the same, or will we recognize people as the individuals that they are?  Are we willing to sacrifice our individual voices and the reason and fairness of the rule of law to a world where tribe fights tribe by suppressing all opposing voices?  Or, are we able to accept our imperfect democracy and work to save it?  Are we still able to welcome diverse voices and viewpoints all with a common cause of protecting and defending the Constitutional freedoms, rights, and responsibilities that have made America a shining example to the world for over 200 years? 

Now is the time to decide, because once we throw out our common purpose and its guiding principle, then it will be very hard, if not impossible, to get it back.   I truly believe that anyone who cares about this country and the freedom, justice, and fairness for which it stands needs to stand up and speak out now or I really fear what we will become.