According to the covenants of the founding fathers

How the impeachment procedure arranges and how it threatens Donald Trump

Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon are three American presidents who were remembered by the nations not by their achievements in domestic and foreign policy, but as objects of investigation under the impeachment article. Now a similar threat hung over Donald Trump. Last Thursday, the House of Representatives of the US Congress supported the continuation of the impeachment process.

More than parliament

The need for a mechanism for removing high-ranking politicians-including the president and vice president-was the basis of the philosophy of state construction of founding fathers. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were convinced that it was Congress that as an institution that formed through direct democracy should act as a restraining factor in relation to the executive branch.

The federalist lobby, led by Alexander Hamilton, achieved the provision of broad powers to the president and his administration, which, according to Jefferson and Franklin, could become a challenge to republicanism. Anxiety was caused by the fact that formally the same person could, if desired, be elected an unlimited number of times for the presidential position.

The will of the formal limiter was the will of George Washington about the need to be content with one person for two terms. For additional guarantees, supporters of the balanced management system laid the tradition of perception of Congress not only as a legislative branch of power, but also in critical situations, as a large folk jury.

Another restraining factor was the absence of any mention of presidential immunity in the main law of the country.

The federalists, even with the support of Washington, could not achieve their ideological competitors of concessions in this matter. The fragile balance between power institutions was supported on these bases until the Second World War, and only after the reign of Franklin Roosevelt was the XXII amendment, which established strict constitutional restrictions. Thus, in the legal sense, the main threat was eliminated only 160 years after the adoption of the Constitution.

Political sentence

However, the discussions continue around the privileges, among which the problem of early termination of the powers of the president. According to the law, it can occur only in three cases: death, removal from office (impeachment), voluntary resignation or inability to exercise the rights and obligations related to the position (incapacity). To date, 8 cases of deaths of current presidents are known: Lincoln, Garfield, McCinley and Kennedy were killed, Harrison, Taylor, Garding and Franklin Delaino Roosevelt died of various diseases.

So far, there was not a single precedent associated with incapacity, and there were three cases when the heads of the White House could be removed according to the impeachment procedure. The second article of the fourth section of the US Constitution states that the president, vice president and all civil officials may be forcibly removed from the authorities for state treason, bribery and other “serious crimes and offenses”. If with the first two points everything is clear, then the latter is extremely blurry, and

The regulatory framework does not give specifics regarding which crimes can be considered “serious”.

Here the jurisprudence ends and politics begins.

Articles of the prosecution are formed by the Law Committee of the House of Representatives, and then the speaker, who plays a peculiar role of the people's prosecutor, takes this to universal vote. In other words, a “serious crime” can potentially become any action of the President, which the legislators of the lower house will consider such.

If the impeachment articles were approved by a majority of votes, the case is referred to the Senate, who acts as a court and makes the final verdict. Voting passes for each point of the prosecution, and if it receives the support of 2/3 of the senators, the impeachment comes into force. When Nixon (Watergate’s case) reported that the upper house would support the decision on impeachment, he immediately resigned of his own free will. In the case of Clinton, who was accused of perjury and obstruction of justice (the Levinsky case), the House of Representatives charged, but the Senate with a difference of 10 votes issued an acquittal.

These are the most serious examples, however, the use of impeachment as a tool of political blackmail is the norm for America. Investigations of various intensities aimed at removing the president from power, were taken against Ulysses Grant, Herbert Guver, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr..

In 2008, Congressman John Kusinich formed 35 accusatory articles against Bush Jr. for the outbreak of war in Iraq and other illegal actions of his administration, and in 2012 the Congressman Walter Jones lobbied the adoption by the House of Representatives of points for impeachment against Obama (CIA closed programs in Afghanistan and Pakistan).

Now the turn has reached Trump. Today, on the one hand, he is still far from getting into a conditional “Nixon” category, on the other hand, his position is much more serious than that of Bush or Obama. So far, the House of Representatives, where the majority of the democrats are most of the impeachment, but the fact of universal vote was a signal of serious intentions.

What the Democrats want

What are they? The first is to gain access to those materials (Russian and Ukrainian folders), which the administration, the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Justice did not want to transfer to the profile committee and give them any publicity. The second is to withdraw a blow from his main candidate Joe Biden (also appears in the Ukrainian case), whose rating is consistently falling. Third - earn electoral bonuses before the most important voting cycles.

And it's not only about the presidential race. In 2020, the re -election awaits all 435 members of the House of Representatives, 34 senators and 11 governors. The rates are too high, and both sides mobilize their resources as much as possible. All funds are good, including impeachment. Democrats did not hide their disappointment with the results of the investigation of the special commission of Müller. Now they are trying to catch on Ukrainian, starting a certain “Zelensky Gate”.

It is not yet clear how far they can advance, because it is one thing to vote for procedural support, another - the formation of specific accusations with the collection of votes in their favor. At the same time, in the Senate, the majority of places behind the Republicans, who will support the impeachment of their own president in only two cases: a) the presence of irrefutable facts about Trump committing a serious crime; b) due to internal intrigues of individual groups of influence. Theoretically, both options are possible.

From the very beginning of the presidency of Donald Trump, two clans were struggled inside the administration: “Family”, led by Ivanka and her husband Kushner and the “group of traditionalists” by Vice President Mike Pence. Certain influential representatives of the republican elites are unhappy that many members of the Trump clan have a serious impact on the adoption of important strategic decisions. Constant internal conflicts caused the personnel permutations unprecedented in American history within one period: 3 National Security Advisers, 3 Minister of Defense, 2 Secretary of State, etc.

However, with all the dislike of Trump, the Republicans will be at a great risk if they decide to use the impeachment card played by the Democrats. There is only no doubt that in his current position the president of America is vulnerable. He will have to look for support in the system of the republican elite, for which he will have to pay a high political price. The game will be multi -level, and no one will stand aside.