donald and the giant (im)peach
Article I of the US Constitution provides the power to formally investigate the president over allegations of “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanours.” This ‘impeachment’ can set into motion the process by which two-thirds of senators are able to vote, convict, and hence remove, the individual from office. The obvious trigger for Trump’s possible impeachment depends upon what exactly constitutes “high crimes and misdemeanours”? An archaic legal term, it dates back to the 1386 impeachment of the Earl of Suffolk who was accused of embezzlement and negligence, and encompasses a broad range of crimes centred around the serious abuse of power by those in the office of public service.
In living memory, these proceedings have been launched against two US presidents – Nixon in 1974 over the Watergate break-in and subsequent cover-up; and Bill Clinton in 1998, for perjury, lying whilst under oath about his cigar-fuelled fling with Monica Lewinsky. Clinton was acquitted and Nixon resigned before he could be tried and convicted. More recently, both George Dubya and Barack Obama were accused of impeachable constitutional offences: Bush for alleged misconduct in going to war with Iraq and Obama for allowing transgender college students to us the bathrooms of their new identity. Neither were ever enacted and if ever there were accusations at either ends of the spectrum!
There have been calls for Donald’s impeachment from the get-go as he refused to defer profits from The Trump Organisation and thus potentially broke the “Emoluments” clause of the Constitution. However, any attempt on these somewhat spurious grounds would have ultimately failed. Recent accusations concerning hidden ‘hush money’ payments and ‘Russian collusion’ certainly change that landscape but in today’s highly politicised, hyper-polarised, state any decision depends ultimately upon whether or not the president can command the support of a third or more of the Senate. Personally, I don’t see this happening anytime soon. What’s perhaps more worrying is that a majority of Republican voters appear to accept his ‘high crimes and misdemeanours’ are part and parcel of the personality and pageant and would support him come what may.
There’s no denying the president is unpredictable, impulsive, thin-skinned, reactive and changeable but at least we all now know that, we kinda know where we stand. Vice President Mike Pearce, the most invisible man in both US and world politics, is the only member of the executive office whom Trump can’t fire as he, like the president, was elected by the people. And it is Mike Pence that would step into the breach. A man who claims to be “a Christian, a conservative, and a Republican, in that order” yet has never taken his boss to task over his cruel and petulant comments about Mexicans, Muslims, women, the disabled, African-Americans, Asians, the media, and even Iowans (#Too much #Monsanto in the #corn creates issues in the brain?). When it comes to actions and principles, the sharp-elbowed Pence is as guarded as his mentor isn’t. I never thought I’d find myself thinking this but better the devil we know!
