The best way to understand the reasoning behind the Articles of Impeachment [draft] is in the context of last week's Judiciary Committee Report on Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment.
What!? You didn't read the report!?
No worries. ⤵️
What!? You didn't read the report!?
No worries. ⤵️
1/ If you compare the expert testimony with the Articles, you can see what the House Dems are trying to do.
Shall we dissect it together? 🤓
Here we go.
Article 1 is Abuse of Power.
nbcnews.com/politics/trump…
The experts said this:
Shall we dissect it together? 🤓
Here we go.
Article 1 is Abuse of Power.
nbcnews.com/politics/trump…
The experts said this:
2/ Article One describes specifically how Trump used the powers and privileges of his office for self-enrichment, and to subvert the national interests in favor of his own personal interests.
nbcnews.com/politics/trump…
nbcnews.com/politics/trump…
3/ To use the B word* or not to use the B word, that was evidently the question.
*bribery
The experts said this ⤵️
Advantage of using the B word: The Constitution includes bribery as impeachable.
*bribery
The experts said this ⤵️
Advantage of using the B word: The Constitution includes bribery as impeachable.
4/ The experts explained that “bribery” as we understand it today in the federal criminal code isn't the same as “bribery” as the drafters understood.
In other words "bribery" in the Constitution isn't the same as bribery in the federal criminal code.
In other words "bribery" in the Constitution isn't the same as bribery in the federal criminal code.
5/ Renee, pointing to the federal criminal code would be to place statutory law above the constitution, and would imply that what is impeachable is derived from federal statutes.
The constitution is the highest law in the land.
The constitution is the highest law in the land.
5/ So Article I stays away from the federal criminal code, but describes the exact behavior contained in the term of art "High Crimes and Misdemeanors."
(It also prevents people from thinking that criminal standards apply).
(It also prevents people from thinking that criminal standards apply).
6/ Article II is Obstruction of Congress, not obstruction of justice.
The point in Article II is that Trump's obstruction goes beyond obstruction of justice ("unprecedented") and strikes at the Constitution itself.
The point in Article II is that Trump's obstruction goes beyond obstruction of justice ("unprecedented") and strikes at the Constitution itself.
7/ Impeachment is [partly] about the power balance between Congress and the Executive Branch.
If impeachment is too easy, the president becomes beholden to Congress.
If impeachment is too difficult, there are no real checks on presidential power.
If impeachment is too easy, the president becomes beholden to Congress.
If impeachment is too difficult, there are no real checks on presidential power.
8/ Article II makes the point that Trump has seized for himself (the executive branch) the power to decide what is impeachable and the power to even stop impeachment altogether, which torpedoes all meaningful checks and balances.
Read this with balance of power in mind⤵️
Read this with balance of power in mind⤵️
9/ I think all critique should begin from a point of understanding: First understand what they're trying to do, then criticize.
They're going for the big picture. This isn't petty fraud or simple theft.
Trump's behavior undermines our form of government and Constitution.
They're going for the big picture. This isn't petty fraud or simple theft.
Trump's behavior undermines our form of government and Constitution.
I combined this thread with my earlier Q and A thread into a single blog post here: terikanefield-blog.com/articles-of-im…
