The 25th and Impeachment by Tom Reynolds
SCOPE’s purpose is to defend the Constitution with an emphasis on the 2nd Amendment. There is a lot going on with the Constitution that will eventually affect the 2nd Amendment.
Perspective is often lacking in political debates. The media is running on amped up emotion with calls to end Trump’s presidency, prematurely. Let’s take a moment and add some perspective.
Pelosi and Schumer are leading the charge to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove the President. There are several problems with this;
As currently constituted, the Vice President, Mike Pence, must lead this effort. Pence says he will not do it. End of conversation?
If Pence did do this, Trump would only have to officially say he is able to do his duty and he resumes the Presidency. The VP and Cabinet could try again and then it goes to Congress to decide, meeting within 48 hours. It then takes a two-thirds vote of Congress to find the President disabled. Even if successful, Pence would only be the Acting President for the remainder of the term. (That’s what the Constitution says, not what you’re hearing from the media.)
The Constitution says the President must be unable to perform the duties of the office. The 25th as well as Article II Section 1 of the Constitution clearly state “inability”. There is no doubt that this term meant disability and not dislike of his actions. It would be an unconstitutional “coup” to do this over dislike of a Presidents’ actions. (That’s called a Banana Republic, which is definitely not in the United States Constitution.)
If Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer were familiar with the Constitution, and there is grave doubt that they have ever read it, they would know that calling for the 25th is, in this instance, only political posturing. Political posturing with the United States at stake? Say it aint so, Nancy, say it aint so!
Lacking the 25th, now Pelosi and Schumer aim at Impeachment (again). And again, there are some issues worth exploring. Primarily, the process takes time and there is only a week and a half left in Trump’s term.
Why try it with such little time remaining?
Some Democrats scream that Trump might start a nuclear war. Yeah, right! It’s more likely Nancy Pelosi will resign from office, give all her hundreds of millions of dollars to the poor and become a Nun.
Do they want to tar Trump as the only President to be impeached twice? Which also means he could be the only President to be acquitted twice. (Remember, it takes two thirds of the Senate to convict.)
With the short time available, there likely is not enough time to hold the trial before January 20th. But there is one precedent for holding an impeachment trial after leaving office: In 1876 the Secretary of War’s impeachment trial happened after he left office. (He was acquitted.)
Would they hold an impeachment trial after January 20th? Why? Trump is already out of office and the purpose of impeachment is remove him from office. Well, not quite. There is another aspect to impeachment.
Trump has threatened to run in 2024 and 74 million people voted for him this time around. But if convicted of impeachment, the Constitution says that he would be disqualified, “… to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States…” He couldn’t run in 2024. If Trump fraudulently lost the 2020 election, are the Democrats afraid that he would be elected in an honest election? (Grover Cleveland did this split term presidencies and Trump would be Biden’s current age in 2024.) Is Pelosi’s and Schumer’s real purpose to deny the American people the opportunity to choose their own President? The Constitution and subsequent Supreme Court decisions come down hard to preserve the right of the people to choose their elected officials.
Let’s speculate on other possible motives. The Democrats control all the levers of federal power. Their Socialist policies have never worked while Trump’s were successful. If the economy is bad in 2024, do Democrats fear that people might long for the good old Trump days?
In politics and life, what goes around comes around. The charges against Trump would be some version of “Inciting riot”. In 2022, the Democrats could easily lose control of both the House and the Senate. Kamala Harris would still be the Vice President. Last year, during the height of riots that caused a dozen deaths and billions in damages, she said those riots should “…not end.” (This is not taking her words out of context, she really said and meant that.) Sounds a lot like “Inciting riot”. If it applies to Republican Presidents it surely applies to Democrat Vice Presidents.
But most importantly, and something which is being completely overlooked, the Constitution is based on the Separation of Powers. Each branch of government has its own powers and the other branches are not allowed to intrude on those powers. One branch may not like what the other branch says and does but they are bound, under their oath to uphold the Constitution, not to intrude on those powers. The Democrats have already tried to break down this constitutional barrier with the first Trump impeachment, which was a trial without a crime.
First of all, they shouldn’t attack one of the centerpieces of our Constitution, Separation of Powers. Second, what goes around comes around. A Republican House and Senate with Joe Biden as President in 2022 might like the precedent set by the Democrats, and even expand upon it. That of course would not be good for the United States but if politicians always did what was good for the United States we would not be in this situation.
Pelosi and Schumer don’t seem to realize that the United States is not a parliamentary republic and impeachment is not a parliamentary “vote of confidence” but they seem to want to treat it as a “vote of confidence”.
With an epidemic, a recession and a change in administrations happening, don’t Pelosi and Schumer have something better to do with their time?
