The latest efforts to impeach Trump was on CNN today by Billionaire Tom STeyer. However, some are suspicious of his wanting to replace Diane Feinstein who might retire from the U.S. Senate Soon because she is in her 80s now.
However, many people, especially democrats are taking him seriously especially after the 5 presidents gathered as one voice to help Hurricane victims in Texas without Trump being there. So, about 1/2 of Republicans want Trump gone and all Democrats do too. So, this might be the beginning of the end of Trump as President now.
It's Time to Impeach Trump - Stand with Tom Steyer: Sign On
Adaction.needtoimpeach.com/
- Join The Growing Movement Demanding Donald Trump's Impeachment: Add Your Name.Demand Impeachment · Stop Donald Trump · Sign the Petition
begin quote from:
Efforts to impeach Donald Trump - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Donald_Trump
Efforts to start the process of impeachment against U.S. President Donald Trump, who took ... Efforts began after a series of events in May 2017. The likelihood of ...
House Democrat files article of impeachment against Trump | TheHill
thehill.com/homenews/.../341677-house-dem-files-article-of-impeachment-against-tru...
Efforts to impeach Donald Trump
Efforts to start the process of impeachment against U.S. President Donald Trump, who took office in 2017, have been initiated by U.S. Representatives Al Green and Brad Sherman, both Democrats.[1][2] Other people and groups have asserted that Trump has engaged in impeachable activity during his presidency.[3][4] Talk of impeachment began before Trump took office,[5][6] as did talk of impeaching his opponent in the general election, Hillary Clinton.[7][8] Efforts began after a series of events in May 2017.[9][10][11] The likelihood of impeachment in 2017 is seen as remote, since Republicans control the House.[12][nb 1]
Contents
Initial impeachment efforts
In December 2016, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Dick Durbin, Chris Coons, Ben Cardin, and Jeff Merkley introduced a bill that would require the President of the United States to divest any assets that could raise a conflict of interest, including a statement that the failure to divest such assets would constitute high crimes and misdemeanors "under the impeachment clause of the U.S. Constitution".[5] Vanity Fair characterized this as a preemptive effort to lay the groundwork for a future impeachment argument.[5] Concerns had previously been expressed that Trump's extensive business and real estate dealings, especially with respect to government agencies in other countries, may violate the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution,[6] sparking debate as to whether that is the case.[13][14]Immediately after his inauguration, The Independent and The Washington Post each reported on efforts already underway to impeach Trump, based on asserted conflicts of interest arising from Trump's ability to use his political position to promote the interests of "Trump"-branded businesses, and ongoing payments by foreign entities to businesses within the Trump business empire as a violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause.[3][4] In March 2017, China provisionally granted 38 "Trump" trademark applications that were set to take permanent effect in 90 days, which were noted to come in close proximity to Trump making policy decisions favorable to China.[15]
The Washington Post further noted the creation of ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org by Free Speech For People and RootsAction, two liberal advocacy groups.[4] On February 9, 2017, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D, New York) had filed a resolution of inquiry, titled "H.Con.Res.5" to force the Trump administration to turn over documents relating to potential conflicts of interest and to ties with Russia.[16] Some sources have identified this as the first step in the process of impeaching Trump.[17][18] Fox News has outlined two potential bases for impeachment, one being the Emoluments Clause and the other being complicity with Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election.[19] On March 21, 2017, it was widely reported that senior Congresswoman Maxine Waters tweeted, "Get ready for impeachment", which Waters explained was in reference to the allegations of collusion with Russian interference in the election.[20]
The Impeach Trump Leadership PAC, a United States political action committee, was started in February 2017 by California Democratic Party congressional candidate Boyd Roberts, who filed documents with the Federal Election Commission to create the PAC on February 13.[21]
Proposed grounds for impeachment and timeline
May 2017
Actions and revelations
In the first public testimony after his firing, James Comey is asked about obstruction of justice
Later in May, news of Donald Trump's disclosure of classified information to Russia led to further discussions about the possibility of impeachment, with Representative Maxine Waters in particular alluding to the possibility.[22]
At almost the same time in May, the revelation that the chief executive had asked Director Comey to let Flynn get a pass led still more observers, including Senator Angus King, to say that impeachment might be in the offing.[23]
The developments led Senator John McCain to venture that matters had reached "Watergate scope and size". This was in reference to the Watergate scandal of the 1972–74 period and, possibly, to the impeachment process against Richard Nixon.[24]
Preparations for possible proceedings
Impeachment proceedings begin with a resolution being introduced in the House of Representatives. The first two Representatives to publicly suggest such an action were Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)[25] and Al Green (D-TX).[26]Two Republican Representatives, Justin Amash (R-Mich.) and Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.), have called for impeachment on the grounds that obstruction of justice charges against Trump were proven true.[27]
Congressman Luis Gutierrez, 'It is the Judiciary Committee in the House where impeachment begins.'
Congressman Al Green's Floor Speech on the Impeachment of President Trump
However, some major Democratic figures have stressed the need for caution, patience and bipartisanship in any potential impeachment process.[32]
Administration officials have said that White House lawyers are indeed researching impeachment proceedings and how to deal with them.[33][34]
Independent counsel appointment
On May 17, 2017, former FBI Director Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, acting after the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, [35] and any cover-up related to it by Trump or any White House officials.[36][37] According to sources close to the White House, the Trump administration is considering using various obscure legal means to slow down the investigation and undermine the special counsel.[38][39]June 2017
Former FBI Director James Comey agreed to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8.[40] Shortly after the date of Comey's testimony was announced however, there was talk of the Trump administration invoking Executive Privilege to block Comey from testifying. Some legal experts and politicians, such as Representative Eric Swalwell of California, argued that Trump's numerous comments in news interviews and on Twitter regarding the subjects Comey would testify on (such as whether or not Trump tried to improperly influence or coerce Comey and the reasons why Trump fired him) may well have voided the validity of an Executive Privilege claim in this instance.[41]On June 7, 2017 an advance copy of Comey's prepared congressional testimony was submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee.[42] In it, he said that on February 14, 2017, the President attempted to persuade him to "let go" of any investigation into Michael Flynn.[43] He added that Trump requested his personal loyalty, to which Comey replied he would give his "honest loyalty" to the President.[44] Comey said Trump on several occasions inquired whether there were an investigation into the President himself, and Comey replied each time there was not.[45] Comey states that Trump requested that he publicly declare this so that Trump's image could be improved, but Comey says he told the President he would need to have approval from the Attorney General's office for reasons of legality.[46] Comey recounted his final conversation with President Trump, on April 11, 2017:
On the morning of April 11, the President called me and asked what I had done about his request that I "get out" that he is not personally under investigation. I replied that I had passed his request to the Acting Deputy Attorney General, but I had not heard back. He replied that "the cloud" was getting in the way of his ability to do his job. He said that perhaps he would have his people reach out to the Acting Deputy Attorney General. I said that was the way his request should be handled. I said the White House Counsel should contact the leadership of DOJ to make the request, which was the traditional channel. He said he would do that and added, "Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know." I did not reply or ask him what he meant by "that thing". I said only that the way to handle it was to have the White House Counsel call the Acting Deputy Attorney General. He said that was what he would do and the call ended.On June 14 The Washington Post reported that Trump was being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for possible obstruction of justice relating to his actions in regard to the Russia investigation.[47]
That was the last time I spoke with President Trump. — James Comey [44]
Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors, by US Congressman Brad Sherman
Former United States Attorney Preet Bharara said in a June 11, 2017 interview with ABC News, "there's absolutely evidence to begin a case" regarding obstruction of justice by Trump.[48] Bharara went on to note, "No one knows right now whether there is a provable case of obstruction. [But] there's no basis to say there's no obstruction."[48]
On June 12, Sherman began circulating an article of impeachment among his colleagues.[2]
July 2017
On July 12, 2017, Congressman Sherman formally introduced in the House of Representatives an Article of Impeachment (H. Res. 438),[49] accusing the president of obstructing and impeding the investigation of justice, regarding the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.[50]The Democrats in the House Judiciary committee demanded that hearings begin as soon as possible,[51] but the Republicans demurred, rewriting the request in favor of investigations into Hillary Clinton's emails.[citation needed]
August 2017
In August 2017, following controversial comments by Trump about the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S. Representative Steve Cohen announced that he would introduce articles of impeachment because Trump had "failed the presidential test of moral leadership".[52][53]October 2017
There was a brief debate about impeaching the president before a privileged resolution introduced by Representative Al Green was withdrawn.[54][55]Representatives supporting Articles of Impeachment
- Brad Sherman (D-CA)
- Al Green (D-TX)
- Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)
- Danny K. Davis (D-IL)
- Yvette Clarke (D-NY)
- Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
- Steve Cohen (D-TN)
- Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX)[56]
Lawsuit strategy
Many of the lawsuits filed against Trump ask for declaratory relief. This remedy differs from injunctive relief (an order to do something or stop) and damages. A court's declaratory judgment compels no action; it simply resolves a legal question. A court may simply declare that a device does not infringe another's patent, for example. A declaration that the president has accepted emoluments would make the work of House Managers easier in an impeachment.[57] Blumenthal v. Trump asks for declaratory relief as to emoluments. In CREW and National Security Archive v. Trump and EOP, a declaratory finding that the administration willfully failed to retain records would support a charge of obstruction of justice.[58] Some observers think the emoluments cases are unlikely to go anywhere, for lack of standing.[59]Symbolic municipal resolutions
City councils that have made formal resolutions calling for the impeachment of President Trump include those in the San Francisco Bay Area cities of Alameda, Berkeley, Oakland, and Richmond,[60][61][62] and the city of Los Angeles.[63] On the East Coast, the Cambridge, Massachusetts city council passed a policy order to support a House resolution to investigate Emoluments Clause conflicts.[64]Public opinion on impeachment
Public opinion is a key factor in impeachment proceedings, as politicians including those in the United States House of Representatives look to opinion polls to assess the tenor of those they represent.[65][66][67] First and foremost action would have to be necessitated on the requisite legal groups for impeachment, with such action being more likely in the face of support from public opinion.[65][66][67]Public Policy Polling reported that as of January 26, 2017, 35% of voters supported the impeachment of President Trump, with 50% opposed.[68] By the following week, after the controversial rollout of Executive Order 13769, which barred people from seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the U.S., support for impeachment had grown to 40%.[69] The following week, support for impeachment reached 46%, matching opposition to impeachment.[70]
In May 2017, for the first time more Americans supported impeaching Trump (48%) than opposed impeaching Trump (41%), with 11% not sure.[71]. At the beginning of August 2017, one poll showed that number falling substantially with 53% of people being opposed to impeachment and 40% in favor, according to PRRI studies,[72] but by the end of August 2017, following political fallout from the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, 48% of people were again in favor of impeachment and 41% were opposed.[73]
| Poll source | Date(s) administered |
Sample size | Sample | Margin of error | Support/Yes | Oppose/No | Undecided/Don't know |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Policy Polling† | January 23–24 | 1,043 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.0% | 35% | 50% | 15% |
| Public Policy Polling† | January 30–31 | 725 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.6% | 40% | 48% | 12% |
| Public Policy Polling† | February 7–8 | 712 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.7% | 46% | 46% | 9% |
| PRRI# | February 10-19 | 1,050 | U.S. adults | ±2.6 | 30% | 65% | 5% |
| Public Policy Polling† | February 21–22 | 941 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.2% | 41% | 46% | 13% |
| Public Policy Polling† | March 10–12 | 808 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.4% | 44% | 45% | 12% |
| Public Policy Polling† | March 27–28 | 677 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.8% | 44% | 45% | 13% |
| Public Policy Polling† | April 17–18 | 648 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.9% | 40% | 48% | 12% |
| Public Policy Polling† | May 12–14 | 692 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.7% | 48% | 41% | 11% |
| Morning Consult/Politico* | May 18–22 | 1,938 | U.S. registered voters | ± 2% | 38% | 46% | 16% |
| Morning Consult/Politico* | May 25–30 | 1,991 | U.S. registered voters | ± 2% | 43% | 45% | 13% |
| Public Policy Polling† | June 9–11 | 811 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.4% | 47% | 43% | 10% |
| Monmouth University** | July 13–16 | 800 | U.S. adults | ± 3.5% | 41% | 53% | 6% |
| Public Policy Polling† | July 14–17 | 836 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.4% | 45% | 43% | 12% |
| Survey USA/USA Today/iMediaEthics‡ | July 17–19 | 1,330 | U.S. adults | ± 2.8% | 42% | 42% | 15% |
| PRRI# | August 2–8 | 1,002 | U.S. adults | ± 2.7% | 40% | 53% | 7% |
| Public Policy Polling† | August 18–21 | 887 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.3% | 48% | 41% | 11% |
| Public Policy Polling† | September 22–25, 2017 | 865 | U.S. registered voters | ± 3.3% | 48% | 43% | 9% |
** Question was: "Do you think President Trump should be impeached and compelled to leave the Presidency, or not?"
* Question was: "As you may know, the first step toward removing a president from office is impeachment. Do you believe Congress should or should not begin impeachment proceedings to remove President Trump from office?"
† Question was "Would you support or oppose impeaching Donald Trump?"
# Question was: "Do you believe the President Donald Trump should be impeached and removed from office, or don't you feel that way?"
See also
- Donald Trump business ties with Russia
- Efforts to impeach George W. Bush
- Efforts to impeach Dick Cheney
- Efforts to impeach Barack Obama
- Impeachment of Andrew Johnson
- Impeachment of Bill Clinton
- Impeachment process against Richard Nixon
- Impeachment March
- Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
- The Plot to Hack America
- TrumpiLeaks
- Trump: The Kremlin Candidate?
Notes
- Some commentators have noted that a president can have his powers and duties suspended under the 25th Amendment of the Constitution. See:
- Cain, Patrick (May 16, 2017), "There's a process to remove incapable presidents, but it probably won't be used on Trump – yet", Globalnews.ca
- Parton, Heather Digby. "Efforts to impeach Donald Trump". Salon. Archived from the original on February 21, 2017.
- Prokop, Andrew. "The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve". Vox. Archived from the original on June 6, 2017.
- "How Is a New Vice President Chosen?", Slate, March 5, 2001, archived from the original on December 17, 2016
- Bank, Justin (April 8, 2008), "Ask FactCheck: Replacing the Vice President", FactCheck.org, archived from the original on January 12, 2017
- "Succession: Presidential and Vice Presidential Fast Facts", CNN, September 26, 2016
- Sorensen, Jeff (June 1, 2017), "Will The Future Blame Us For Donald Trump's Presidency?", The Huffington Post
- "The investigation into Donald Trump and Russia: FAQ", Macleans.ca, May 19, 2017, archived from the original on June 4, 2017
References
- Singman, Brooke (June 7, 2017). "Reps. Green and Sherman announce plan to file articles of impeachment". Fox News. Archived from the original on June 7, 2017. Retrieved June 7, 2017.
- For the draft resolutions, see: Sherman, Brad (2017), Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. (PDF), United States House of Representatives, archived (PDF) from the original on June 12, 2017 and Green, Al (May 17, 2017), "Calling for Impeachment of the President" (PDF), Congressional Record, United States House of Representatives, 63 (85), pp. H4227–H4228 (video at YouTube Archived June 9, 2017, at the Wayback Machine.)
Further reading
 |
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Efforts to impeach Donald Trump. |
- Lichtman, Allan J. (2017), The Case for Impeachment, Dey Street Books, ISBN 978-0062696823
- Cole, Jared P.; Garvey, Todd (October 29, 2015). "Impeachment and Removal" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved 14 July 2017.
'You look at the bill Sen. Warren sponsored,' he added. 'The lawsuits ask for declaratory judgment to fill in very wide gaps and reasoning.'
That the City Council call upon the United States House of Representatives to support a resolution authorizing and directing the House Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether sufficient grounds exist for the impeachment of Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, including but not limited to the violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause and the Domestic Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution
Public opinion matters because for impeachment to happen, Congress must act, and elected officials sometimes hang their principles on opinion polls.
So the House of Representatives could turn against Mr Trump, and there could be sufficient legal grounds to impeach him. But to actually kickstart start the mechanism for removing him from office there would probably have to be a shift in public opinion.
But ultimately, the probability of a push for impeachment succeeding is dependent on public opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment