Is Impeachment Just a Pipe Dream?

 

     In the Harper Dictionary of Contemporary Usage, 2^nd Edition, by William and Mary Morris the following passage concerning the use of the word impeachment is set down, precisely, as thus:

 

     A common misconception is that impeachment refers to the trial, conviction and removal from public office of an official. While impeachment could lead to such a result, in itself it is only the bringing of charges. The language of our constitution is quite clear on this point. “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Note that impeachment- or accusation- is not enough. Conviction, by a two-thirds vote of the Senate, must follow if the accused is to be found guilty. If fewer than two-thirds of the Senators vote for conviction, the accused is cleared of charges and remains in office, as was the case with Andrew Johnson, Dem. (served 1865-1869).

 

     In my copy of this very thick and very detailed dictionary, its second publication date is 1985- the year before I bought and started perusing it any time someone questioned my use of a particular word. Being a connoisseur of words it has been a wonderful addition to my constantly enlarging personal reference library. Sometimes you’ll find a slang word hopelessly and hilariously out-of-date but in the context of serious writing it is still quite prodigious and accurate.

     That being said, I will point out that the two words underlined are my doing because their emphasis has been insisted upon by all manner of persons who dislike the use of impeachment to curtail power abuse of any president of the United States. Apparently, the employment of impeachment on rogue and/or fraudulent presidents has been largely unsuccessful and does little to achieve its objective- removal from the Oval office. The latest use of impeachment against Trump was commenced too late to do any good for the populace or our beleaguered congress.

     Is it enough of a stain on a reputation just to have been a subject of impeachment? I believe so. It hasn’t been employed very often or perhaps, often enough but I think we can all see that something needs to be changed in the process in order for it be effective should an impeachment be an imminent need. The beginning of this year was one of those times. What happened on January 6^th when Trump incited a riotous insurrection against our state capitol, as our votes were being given another chance to speak their minds, was about as bad as it gets. I wonder how the people who lost their lives that day would view it now if they had the chance to speak their mind? That is what the legal process is all about and why we have laws. No president should be able to continue to hold office who says, “I’m the president. I can do anything I want with impunity.”

     Therefore, I believe it is time to put together a procedure that will get to the heart of a matter quickly- as any trial should be conducted- and that a vote of the people be employed rather than a comparatively small band of senators for decision making on such a trial. If we’re going to conduct these procedures it should be to get to the truth and it’s now entirely possible to do this because technology has made it possible. It will put power of government back into the hands of those to whom it belongs. Bipartisanship belongs at state fairs and Trump rallies- not in our judicial system. If Trump had ever understood anything about branches of government he would not have tried even a few of his many tactics attempting to convince the public that he had any business being president of the United States of America. Candidates should have to take a test and pass it with a 100% before they qualify to run.

The Castle Lady