WASHINGTON, D.C. – The irony of Nancy Pelosi’s move to impeach Trump for “Obstruction of Congress” is arguably that it’s exactly what she herself is now doing.
In the impeachment debacle of President Trump, the first “political” impeachment in history, Democrats in the House cited two “violations:”
Article I was “Abuse of Power.”
Article II was “Obstruction of Congress.”
Neither one of these articles rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” and therefore are not impeachable offenses, but I digress.
Let us address the second article, “obstruction of Congress.” While the president has a constitutional basis for the conduct that House Democrats are calling “obstruction,” the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has no such basis.
Let’s look at some of the rhetoric that was emanating from the hot air chamber of the Democrat caucus. For weeks, Democrats such as Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, and Pelosi herself insisted that President Trump was a threat to our “national security,” that “elections themselves are threatened by enemies foreign or domestic,” and that, “if we do not act now, we would be derelict in our duty.”
Indeed, the most serious legal action that a legislative body in the United States can take against the duly elected president was undertaken in weeks. By contrast, the impeachment inquiry against Bill Clinton took over two months from the time it started until Clinton was impeached by the House.
Yet, Pelosi has now said that she wasn’t prepared to deliver the articles of impeachment to the deciding body, the US Senate, and said that she had not yet decided who the House “managers” in the Senate would be.
The funny part is, both Pelosi and Chuckie Schumer, Senate Minority Leader are complaining that the trial in the Senate will not be ‘fair.”
They had no such reservations when Schiff ran roughshod over Republicans in the inquisition before the House Intelligence Committee. Schiff decided who would be allowed to testify, had autocratic authority over questions asked, and even actively advised witnesses as to their testimony when questioned by Republicans. Apparently for Democrats, “fair” is a one-way street.
When Democrats speak of fairness, they seem to be talking about fairness to them, in this case the “prosecution.” They have so much faith in their case being “rock solid” that they want to be able to call additional witnesses in the trial before the Senate.
So, President Trump, who is, according to the House a “clear and present danger” and a “threat to national security” isn’t as much of a threat as Democrats were making him out to be.
Pelosi has now said that she will not send over the articles of impeachment to the Senate until after she and the rest of the House Democrats enjoy their Christmas recess. Hopefully, President Trump doesn’t go “rogue” during that two-week period of time.
Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution clearly states:
“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”
Nowhere does it say that the House gets to demand how the process works and who can testify. That is the sole responsibility of the Senate under the Constitution.
The Constitution also allows the Senate to hold a trial as soon as an impeachment takes place in the House. This is not subject to the interpretation of left-wing college professors or liberal talking heads on cable news.
Pelosi herself is arguably currently obstructing the Senate by refusing to transmit the impeachment articles to that body.
This means one of two things. Either Pelosi knows that the impeachment is doomed to defeat in the Senate (obvious since Republicans have the majority and it is extremely unlikely that a sufficient number can be turned in order to reach a 2/3 threshold), or she never intended to transmit the articles in the first place.
Democrats in one form or another have been seeking to impeach President Trump since he was inaugurated, if not before. Pelosi herself admitted that they have been working on impeachment for 2-1/2 years.
Maxine Waters (D-CA) has made her slogan “Impeach 45.” Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), at a rally after she was sworn into Congress said:
“We’re gonna impeach the motherf*cker!”
Congressman Al Green said:
“The only thing that can prevent President Trump from re-election in 2020 is to impeach him.”
Why would Pelosi not send the articles to the Senate? She may feel she doesn’t have to.
Since this impeachment has all the makings of a political impeachment, which the founders warned against, instead of a legal impeachment, Pelosi may feel that just the fact that Trump was impeached will make for good sound bites for Democrats in next year’s election.
In the case of the president, who can cite text and precedent in resisting congressional subpoenas, Pelosi’s obstruction is unlawful and unprecedented. One could easily claim that Pelosi herself is guilty of obstruction of Congress, by interfering with the Senate’s duty to adjudicate the articles the House passed.
Based on precedent set by the House, apparently the intent or possibility of committing an action is sufficient to hold an elected official in contempt. Nadler himself alluded to this during the House impeachment debate, stating,
“The threat is urgent. If we do not act—now—what happens next will be our responsibility as well as his.”
If this is the new standard Pelosi and the Democrats have set, then she too should be held accountable for trying to undermine the Constitution or her intention to do so.
In some ways, it would be nice to see Mitch McConnell and the Republicans actually hold a trial in the Senate, and subpoena the so-called “whistleblower,” Adam Schiff, the Bidens, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, John Brennan, and the rest of the deep-state cabal that conspired to overturn an election that was an electoral landslide for President Trump.
McConnell will likely tire of the Democrat grandstanding and just dismiss the impeachment. It would be nice however to add a cherry on top—charging Pelosi with Contempt of Congress for stonewalling the ability of the Senate to try the case.
As we reported last night, holding back those articles of impeachment could easily backfire.
Joel Pollak of Breitbart reported that Pelosi appears to be considering an idea Democrats have floated for several days of holding back the articles of impeachment to exercise leverage over the Senate and the president.
Her move is not only a violation of Constitutional procedures, but could result in the Senate acquitting the President without a formal trial.
Unfortunately for Speaker Pelosi and the Democrat House Majority, the Senate can act regardless — and would vote to acquit.
“That’s because the Constitution is absolutely clear about the Senate’s authority. Article I, Section 3 says: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments’…”
The Chief Justice presides over a trial involving the president, but the Senate makes the rules.
And the Senate is controlled by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who regards what the House has done with contempt.
Politico outlined Democrats’ new idea, citing constitutional lawyer Laurence Tribe (but, interestingly, not the Constitution itself).
Pelosi hopes to pressure McConnell into holding a “fair trial” — this, after she and her party broke every relevant House rule and precedent, and several Amendments in the Bill of Rights, all in the name of their “sole Power of Impeachment.”
They forget that a “fair trial” applies to the accused, not the accuser, and has since 1215.
Set aside, for the moment, that holding onto the articles of impeachment would contradict everything Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and the Democrats have said for weeks about the “urgency” of impeachment.
They needed to stop him before he could “cheat in the next election,” we were told — that’s why the House could not wait for the courts to rule on the White House’s resistance to stop congressional subpoenas.
All of that would be exposed as a lie.
During parts of the hearings controlled by the Democrats, phrases like “the President is an ‘existential threat’ to national security” and that the President must be removed immediately because of “the impact on our world” and “we have to do this right now for our grandchildren” were uttered ad nauseum by both politicians and left-leaning news sources.
Now this delay by Pelosi seems to contradict their “hair on fire” attitudes toward the President and show the transparency of their farce of a process.
Three factors are glaringly true:
- If Pelosi refuses to submit the articles of impeachment to the Senate, McConnell can convene the Senate anyway, summon the Chief Justice, and swear in the Senators as jurors. Democrats can boycott, but they can’t stop the trial.
- McConnell can then propose to dismiss the charges or even hold a vote to acquit the president.
- Pelosi can hide the articles of impeachment in Adam Schiff’s basement forever, and it won’t make a bit of difference.
In a related matter, it is truly astonishing that a huge majority of liberals believed that by the act of passing Articles of Impeachment in the House of Representatives, President Trump would be removed from office.
This isn’t now, nor has it ever been true, or the way things work. Former President Bill Clinton was impeached by the house and didn’t leave office. And he was found guilty of a crime.
Former President Richard Nixon resigned from office near the end of his term. He was also found guilty of a crime.
President Trump hasn’t been found guilty of anything – in fact, the articles are so vague, the chance of him being convicted even in a Democrat-majority Senate is close to impossible. Even then, he doesn’t have to leave office.
That’s one of those “what if” scenarios that doesn’t exist – we have a Republican-controlled Senate and 67 votes are required to convict.
In all fairness, there’s enough exculpatory evidence of fraud and bias displayed by Democrats to take a conviction effort and shoot it in the proverbial foot.
And next comes the results of the Durham investigation. It’s likely that 2020 will be a good year for patriots.
None of this is going to stop politicians from trying. As a matter of fact, there’s chatter about impeaching President Trump AGAIN – but this time over a joke he made in 2016.
Congresswoman Norma Torres, a California Democrat argued at the House Rules Committee earlier this week that President Donald Trump should be impeached, among other reasons, for his famous joke about shooting someone on 5th Avenue.
In what has turned out to be the real joke, bordering on actual abuse of power, the House of Representatives did vote along party lines to impeach the President last night.
Torres said that Trump was becoming an autocrat, such as those in Central America, and Congress therefore had a duty to stop him.
“Now, President Trump famously said that he could shoot someone dead in the middle of Fifth Avenue in New York City and he would get away with it. What mindset do you have to be in to say this out loud on national TV, and to believe that?” Torres asked. “Well, anyone that turns a blind eye to behavior like this is providing him that right.”
According to Breitbart, Trump’s original comment was made when he was a candidate, not president. He said it during a campaign rally in Iowa in January of 2016 and was expressing his wonder at the loyalty of his supporters — not expressing an actual desire to shoot anyone, much less describing his anticipated constitutional authority as president.
Even “fact-checker” Snopes said,
It’s true that Trump made the “shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue” remark widely attributed to him across standard and social media sites. However, the (somewhat clumsy and crass) comment also generally appeared absent of its broader context, which pertained to the loyalty of his followers, and not an actual desire, intent, or interest in shooting any individuals for the sole reason that he believed it would have no effect on his popularity.
These were not actions taken as President, nor did the statement rise to the level of being criminal. But that fact has not been a deterrent to any of the President’s detractors so far.
Ironically, the most vocal on the left have flat out stated that the entire impeachment push has been for the sole purpose of getting him out of office so that he will not win re-election in 2020.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler said that impeachment was “not a punishment for past behavior,” but to prevent future misconduct by the president.
Congressman Al Green, a Houston Democrat, has been seeking to impeach the 45th President since shortly after his inauguration, filing articles impeachment in 2017.
Green famously said:
“I’m concerned that if we do not impeach this president, he will get re-elected.”
Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, in reference to the 2020 election, said:
“This is not just about something that has occurred, about preventing a potentially disastrous outcome next year.”
Fellow member of ‘The Squad,’ Rashida Tlaib, celebrated at her election victory party by saying:
“We’re going to go in and impeach the mother f—–!”
Tulsi Gabbard, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for 2020, voted “present” in the impeachment proceedings, saying that she could not, in good conscience, vote yes or no.
But in September, she said:
“I think impeaching this president would be extremely divisive at this time, but it is important to keep him from getting re-elected.”
In essence, those voting in favor of impeachment have nothing to work with regarding an actual crime or abuse of power. Instead, they simply use their numbers to try to undue an election that they were not happy about. Unable to do that, they turned their sights on 2020 by trying to oust President Trump from office.
Is their derangement so strong as to believe that their vote will accomplish this when they do not hold control of the Senate, who will likely acquit the President?
When the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, announced the adoption of the articles of impeachment, the Democrats started to cheer, drawing a stern look frOm Pelosi.
While they planned to show solemnity and somberness publicly, their celebrations were supposed to be in private.
As the House Republican Whip, Steve Scalise tweeted:
“WATCH Dems expose their true colors. Nancy Pelosi had to shut down Democrat applause when the first article of impeachment passed. So much for Dems claiming impeachment is ‘solemn’ for them. What a ridiculous lie!”
Scalise also posted his 5 minutes addressing the House ahead of the vote. In it, reminded everyone of the truth. This President has committed no crimes, no impeachable offenses.
But as Al Green also stated:
“The President doesn’t have to commit a crime to be impeached.”
Thankfully, in the criminal justice system, we have due process. We have to prove guilt or innocence.
We cannot simply sentence people on a whim.
The 230 members of the House that voted to impeach a President who committed no crimes would be wise to remember that.
In case you missed it, this morning, a police officer offered a friendly morning reminder: “Trump is still your President.”
It’s 1:15 a.m. and I pull this guy over. He’s smashed. I mean SMASHED.
“Where are you coming from?” I ask him.
He starts giggling like a school girl.
“A parrrrtyyyyy,” he said. “We just watched them kick President Trump out of office. I be celebrating like a mo-fo.”
You should have seen the look on his face when I told him President Trump wasn’t kicked out of office… and that he was under arrest for drunk driving.
Made my night.
Now that I’m done with the paperwork and my shift, I thought I should issue sort of a public bulletin. It’s pretty simple:
Good morning, America. Just a friendly reminder that President Trump is still your president.
Listen – I’ll admit, I didn’t vote for the guy. But that’s only because I haven’t voted in three decades. I just don’t give a damn about politics. Or DIDN’T give a damn.
But listening to the impeachment charade yesterday, I’ve gotta tell you something. I’ll be voting in 2020 – and I’ll be voting for the guy who actually gives a shit about law enforcement. That’s Captain Trump.
Did you know that Nancy Pelosi had the gall to actual stand next to a cardboard flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance? The irony on that America-hating, police-bashing fool pretending she loves this country while she tries to light the Constitution on fire would be laughable if it wasn’t so disgusting.
Did you know that LET has a “safe space” for those who support emergency responders and veterans? It’s where we share the untold stories of patriotic Americans – including wounded officers. Proceeds go back into helping these heroes. Check it out today.
The woman could have been a true leader in the party, stopping the mayhem of a partisan attack on not just President Trump… but on everyone Democrats hate for electing him. But she didn’t.
She was off to a good start, in fairness.
It was right after the midterm elections that her party once again took up the mission of impeaching Trump that they started just after the election, all because they were simply pissed that hardworking Americans had actually voted him into office.
Pelosi repeatedly said she wouldn’t advance the calamity, suggesting it would tear America apart unless there was a bipartisan consensus.
“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path,” she told The Washington Post in March.
She figured she’d wait for special counsel Robert Mueller to deliver on collusion charges, and it would bring everyone together in an impeachment camp. But he didn’t. No collusion.
You’d think that would bring the country back together, right? Proving that President Trump didn’t work with Russian to sway the election.
Of course it didn’t. Because it was never about law and order and doing the right thing – it was always about their raw hatred.
By early June, more than 50 Democrats were openly calling for impeachment again, and still Pelosi resisted.
“I don’t think there’s anything more divisive we can do than to impeach a president of the United States, and so you have to handle it with great care,” Pelosi said to CNN on June 16. “It has to be about the truth and the facts to take you to whatever decision has to be there. It should by no means be done politically.”
Then, on September 24, she flip-flopped on impeachment, seemingly realizing that their best shot at stopping Trump from winning in 2020 would be to impeach him over unverified claims of an anonymous whistleblower regarding Trump’s phone call with the president of Ukraine.
She believed the call would be the smoking gun.
“The actions of the Trump presidency revealed dishonorable facts of betrayal of his oath of office and betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections,” she said.
But just 24 hours later, the transcript of the Ukraine call was released, and it was a dud.
It didn’t matter to Pelosi, who was at that point confident she had the votes to impeach in the house.
Michael Goodwin put it best in his op-ed in the New York Post:
Watching the so-called debate Wednesday, I was struck by how the impeachers, desperate to inflate their base partisan passions into something noble, have cheapened our nation’s history and language.
They resembled Grade B actors performing for the cameras, their rehearsed references to oaths, prayers, the Founding Fathers, the rule of law, checks and balances and the Constitution itself all sounding contrived. Rather than reflecting actual gravitas, the words were trotted out to create the appearance of it.
That was consistent with Pelosi’s latest demand that her members stay “solemn” in public, so as not to give the impression that they were gloating and joyful. In other words, hide how you really feel so we can fool more people into joining us.
Only the damage to America is real.
So what does it all mean? Is President Trump still the President?
For those of you who slept through Civics class, the answer is yes. He’s still your president.
Wednesday night, the House of Representatives impeached Trump on two articles. They voted almost entirely along party lines – 230-197 to charge Trump with abuse of power and 229-198 to charge him with obstruction of Congress.
Only two Democrats voted against both articles, Reps. Collin Peterson of Minnesota and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, who is expected to soon switch parties.
Rep. Jared Golden of Maine voted for one impeachment article and Republican-turned independent Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan voted to impeach Trump on both counts.
Then there was Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, who simply voted present for both articles.
In the meantime, President Trump held the longest rally speech of his presidency at an event where people waited in massive lines in sub-freezing temperatures all day to see him.
So now what?
The vote moves the impeachment proceedings to the Senate, where a trial is expected in January.
At a policy lunch Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told Republican senators that he will announce by the end of the week the date for the start of the Senate trial.
Then it will be up to the Senate, which is held by Republicans, to decide whether to convict Trump and remove him from office.
In other words… he’s still your President. And thanks to this political attack by Democrats on President Trump and his supporters… he probably will be for another four years.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!