The second impeachment trial of President Donald Trump has begun with the debate of whether the impeachment is constitutional. Lead House Impeachment Manager, Jamie Raskin, a Representative of Maryland (D), starts off by showing a video of Trump’s rally and the subsequent actions of “insurgents” (a.k.a. Stop the Steal protestors), showing the ugly side of what transpired on January 6, 2021. The video even showed the shooting of unarmed protestor, Ashli Babbitt, who died on the scene from a gunshot wound. A video of this nature was clearly designed to pull at the heart strings of all Americans. In my opinion, showing the tragic death of Ashli Babbitt was perhaps one of the most distasteful things I’ve ever witnessed. My prayers go out to her family for having to relive Ashli’s death in the name of impeaching a President who is no longer in office.
Showing the video, which was very much one-sided, Representative Raskin begins quoting the Federalist Papers and other historical texts showing that this impeachment is constitutional, and that history has shown that previously occupied public positions can be impeached, even if that person no longer holds office. If you are not familiar with the Federalist Papers, they were written by three of America’s founding-fathers and they were designed to convince people to accept the Constitution, especially those people who were against its passage. In other words, the Federalist Papers were no different than propaganda. However, many may argue that these Papers helped to define specific elements of the Constitution for a better understanding. Regardless of the purpose behind the documents, they were designed to garner support for the passage of the Constitution just as flyers dropped on an enemy’s population are designed to garner support from that population. An interesting fact to consider with their use of the Federalist Papers as support for this impeachment is that Alexander Hamilton, one of the authors of these same papers added in Essay 65 that politicians may be tempted to abuse the impeachment power when he said:
”…that the most conspicuous characters in it will…be too often the leaders or the tools of the most cunning or the most numerous faction, and on this account can hardly be expected to possess the requisite neutrality towards those whose conduct may be the subject of scrutiny.”
Various arguments made to support this impeachment are almost mind-boggling when you factor in the fact that there is evidence that the election was tampered with. Furthermore, despite the evidence already presented, several courts have dismissed court cases without even reviewing any of that evidence. And finally, the Department of Justice turned its back on election fraud allegations that, at a minimum, should have warranted further investigation. Unfortunately, no investigations were ordered, evidence was ignored, and Congress went on to certify the election. How come we aren’t impeaching Congress for certifying an election when there was clearly evidence of election fraud? Where is the constitutionality in that very fact? Congress is no more above the law than the President of the United States and We the People should be focusing on that instead of persecuting a man who isn’t even holding office.
Final thoughts: Consider the same speeches given by thousands of politicians all around this country at thousands of rallies asking for people to stand up and be heard, to let the government know how we feel and what it is we want. Representatives have given speeches just like Trump’s rally speech on January 6, 2021, and their speeches, most recent of which occurred during the Black Lives Matter protests, led to BILLIONS of dollars in damage to businesses, buildings, etc., and resulted in hundreds of injuries and over a dozen deaths. If Trump’s speech incited violence than to that same right, so did the speeches given by those various members of Congress.