December 5, 2019
The continuation of the Democrats’ attempt to destroy Trump’s presidency has moved onto the Judiciary Committee with Jerry Nadler at the reins.
The opening day featured four law professors who were tasked with explaining the constitutionality of impeachment and opining on whether they believed Trump’s actions met the founding fathers’ threshold to remove a duly elected president from office.
Three of the legal scholars were handpicked by Democrats, and one by Republicans. Not to give away the ending, but the three experts chosen by the Democrats testified that Trump’s actions were unquestionably impeachable offenses. Yes- shocking.
Also not surprising, the three experts selected by the Democrats, Pamela Karlan, Noah Feldman, and Michael Gerhardt, have a paper trail indicating their liberal partisanship. Feldman has written numerous op-eds dating from 2017 about the prospects of impeaching Trump. Gephardt and Karlan have both contributed to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Karlan has also given thousands to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren.
Throughout the long hearing, Karlan displayed visceral anger. Her animus for Trump was palpable. A past statement of Karlan’s confirms that her “scholarly” opinions are filtered through her hatred for the president. In 2017 Karlan described that while walking down the street in Washington D.C, as she approached the Trump hotel, rather than walk past it she crossed the street. When someone asked her if she stayed at the hotel she stated “Oh goodness NO.”
Adding to his credibility, and proof that he is not driven by a political agenda or personal feelings, the Republican’s pick- Jonathan Turley, is a self-described Democrat who voted for Barack Obama, and in 2016 Hillary Clinton.
All of the Democrats’ experts believe that Trump’s impeachable offenses included: abuse of power, obstruction of justice, bribery, and pushing a foreign power to influence an election.
Turley Eviscerated the Democrats’ Arguments
Turley conceded that Trump’s phone call with President Zelensky of Ukraine was not “perfect’ ”. However, he stated that Trump’s request to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden’s role in the firing of the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating his son’s employer does not “make this a plausible case for bribery.”
Turley explained that “If President Trump honestly believed that there was a corrupt arrangement with Hunter Biden that was not fully investigated by the Obama administration, the request for an investigation is not corrupt..” He also correctly added that Trump never stated a quid pro quo. Trump expressed to the only witness who had direct contact with him that he wanted nothing from Zelensky and that he wanted “no quid pro quo.”
Turley logically surmised that conversations between heads of state are probably often “freewheeling” and “informal”. He added that “If this conversation is a case of bribery, we could have marched every living president off to the penitentiary”. He also stated that “If these conversations are now going to be reviewed under sweeping definitions of bribery, the chilling effect on future presidents would be perfectly glacial.”
Opining on what he believed our first president of the United States would say about the impeachment proceedings against President Trump Turley stated,
“If you would make a case to George Washington that you could impeach a president over a conversation he had with another head of state, his powdered hair would catch on fire.”
Turley schooled the impeachment mob, who are accusing Trump of obstructing justice, explaining that the President’s refusal to allow his top aides to testify unless there’s a court order, is the President’s constitutional right. Democrats could have pursued a court ruling, but with the 2020 election looming they’re choosing expediency instead. Turning the congressional Democrats’ accusation back on them Turley stated,
“If you impeach a President of the United States, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it’s an abuse of power – It’s your abuse of power.”
Rep. Ratcliffe stated to Turley, “So if I were to summarize your testimony- no bribery, no extortion, no obstruction of justice, no abuse of power.” Turley’s response- “Not on this record.”
Impeachment is the ultimate check in our system of checks and balances. Hence, it has rarely occurred in our nation’s history. President Trump is only the fourth president in U.S. history to be facing impeachment. Both Richard Nixon, who resigned before he could be impeached, and Bill Clinton committed a crime while in office. Andrew Johnson, who was impeached in the House, but like Clinton acquitted in the Senate, did not commit a crime. Many historians today consider Johnson’s impeachment to have been politically motivated and a stain on the House of Representatives.
Like Johnson President Trump has not committed a crime that even those among the most zealous impeachment advocates can articulate. At first, they were accusing Trump of proposing a “quid quo pro”. Reportedly, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee conducted focus groups, asking which was more compelling, “quid quo pro”, “extortion”, or ‘bribery”. It looks like “bribery” was the winner.
During the hearing Turley warned,
“I’m concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. I believe this impeachment not only fails to satisfy the standard of past impeachments but would create a dangerous precedent for future impeachments.’
Unfortunately, Democrats have never been good at assessing the unintended consequences of their actions. It is almost a certainty that they will move forward with their politically motivated impeachment. History will not look kindly on those who have used the impeachment process to achieve political gains.
