Alan Dershowitz was on CNN this morning saying he’s only helping Trump’s defense against impeachment because he’s against impeachment, not for Trump. That idea in itself is suspect, but let’s let it go for now. Who cares why he wants to defend Trump?
But his argument against impeachment is that a president is only impeachable for “high crimes,” and abuse of power is not a high crime. He’s hanging this argument on the words of Justice Benjamin Curtis, who was Andrew Johnson’s lead defense counsel for his impeachment.
Dershowitz said that Curtis argued that the president could only be impeached for high crimes. He may have said that somewhere along the line, but the impeachment speech he’s remembered for is his opening for the Senate trial.
From Wikipedia:
In 1868, Curtis acted as chief counsel for the Impeachment of U.S. President Andrew Johnson during the impeachment trial. He read the answer to the articles of impeachment, and it was "largely his work." His opening statement lasted two days, and was commended for legal prescience and clarity.[10][22] He successfully persuaded the Senate that an impeachment was a judicial act, not a political act, so that it required a full hearing of evidence. This precedent "influenced every subsequent impeachment."
I don’t think Justice Curtis meant what you think he meant, Mr. Dershowitz.
Be that what it may, is abuse of the power of the presidency a high crime? The answer is it’s the highest crime possible.
The reason the Constitution included a procedure for impeachment and removal of a president is the founding fathers knew that human beings, when trusted with the unparalleled power of the presidency, sometimes give in to their baser instincts. It was always a possibility that the Electoral College was going to elect someone who didn’t have a strong enough moral compass to use his power for the good of the United States, not himself.
That’s exactly what happened here. The facts are not in dispute (unless you’re Trump or someone who gets their paycheck for acting on his behalf.) The president of the United States tried to use the power of his office to get dirt on a political opponent. He extorted the president of Ukraine to start an investigation that even if it found nothing, would tar Joe Biden. He carried out the extortion by withholding money Ukraine desperately needed to defend itself from Russia. It doesn’t get much more clear cut than that.
He’s done a lot of stuff that qualifies as criminal, but the House decided to hang its case on that.
Then, he tried to cover up what he did by obstructing the House investigation. That’s the second article.
Everyone keeps trying to say that impeachment can’t be a political process. It has to be undertaken for pure motives. But that’s not true.
Impeachment is nothing but a political process. When the founders put it in the hands of the House and the Senate, they were making it a political process. The standard for removing the president of the United States is, very simply, two-thirds of the Senate want him gone. A president whose party controls neither the House nor the Senate is in constant danger of being removed — so he must tread carefully. That’s why Clinton was impeached. He had both chambers when he was elected, and he lost the House.
The grounds for impeachment were ridiculously thin. Yes, he committed perjury when he lied about his affair under oath. But he was lying about something nobody had a right to ask him about. When a president does something as president, we have a right to ask anything we want about it. But do we have a right to ask him about his relationship with his wife? I bet there’s of plenty nasty stuff between Donald and Melania. Do we have the right, in a deposition, to ask “Was there ever a time when you couldn’t get an erection when you were in bed with your wife?” You can bet he would lie about that. Monica Lewinsky was a threat to the Clintons’ marriage, not to the nation. My feelings about Bill Clinton have changed a lot in the years since his impeachment, but not about the impeachment itself. It was not a legitimate reason to remove the president.
The same basic condition led to Trump’s impeachment. Not infidelity to his wife, though, infedelity to the nation. Trump was impeached because he lost the House in 2018. If the GOP had held the House, he would not have been impeached. That’s how the people get to weigh in on impeachment. If you don’t want a president impeached, vote for his party in the mid-terms.
The circumstances are the same, but not the substance. Clinton committed perjury over a private matter that should have remained between himself and his wife. Trump has used the power of the presidency to benefit himself. That is impeachable.
If you tried to explain to the founding fathers about Trump inviting the Russians to interfere in our elections to benefit him, they would have a very hard time understanding that. But if you told them he was using the power of the United States to force foreign leaders into deals that benefited him personally, they’d be be shouting “Impeach that sucker!”
Trump’s deranged fear babbling lately has had people starting to talk about using the 25th Amendment against him again. But that’s never going to happen. The 25th Amendment is a lot less political than impeachment. The 25th Amendment was written as a reaction to the Kennedy assassination. While Lyndon Johnson took power smoothly after President Kennedy died, it got people thinking about what would happen if both the president and vice president died at the same time. So the 25th was written to solidify the line of succession. By putting its activation in the hands of people the president himself chose (his cabinet, his vice president) the writers made sure it couldn’t be used simply because the other party gained enough power to activate it. It’s not meant to remove a president who does things people don’t like. It’s meant to remove a president who is in a coma.
The impeachment trial that is now underway has a high likelihood of acquitting Trump simply because the GOP still controls the Senate. They’re not going to remove Trump unless a sudden, unexpected undercurrent of conscience washes over the chamber. Don’t bet the farm on it.
But we still have a big say in what happens next. Flip the Senate. There’s the answer that will stop Trump even if he pulls off another Russian miracle.
Flip. The. Senate.
That needs to be our mantra for the next 10 months.