I would like add some ideas to the subject of the impeachment proceedings.
First, the Constitution assigns the House of Representatives the role of deciding whether and when to impeach, one of the checks and balances to deal with abuse of power by an elected official – the only check on the president. The preliminary impeachment proceedings that have been held so far in committees, without the public, are, I believe, entirely appropriate. I see the inquiry as akin to a grand jury investigation, which has as its purpose to determine whether there are facts to warrant an indictment, in this case impeachment. This serves to prevent potential witnesses from hearing the evidence of other witnesses, know what the inquiry is focusing on, and tailor their testimony to slant their version of the facts.
After the hearings establish that there are facts to be investigated, then is the time to hold open hearings, as Congress is now preparing to do.
The president’s supporters claim the process has been unfair, but the process has not been materially different from similar proceedings led by Republican majorities.
The mob action taken by some Congressmen storming into the meeting room (I say mob because I hope none of them would have acted alone in such a juvenile way) was clearly to divert attention from the facts and make a public display that would get in the news. Those that were on the committee should have been there participating, not pretending to have been unfairly excluded.
The claim that a sitting president may not be subject to inquiry, and that the president should not be impeached because the voters should decide at the next election, is ridiculous. Impeachment is the only remedy to prevent further abuse of power. Left unchecked, it will escalate.
The inquiry is focused on whether the president tried to compel the government of Ukraine to investigate the Biden family (Joe Biden being a potential political rival in the next election) in exchange for release of foreign aid that was voted on by Congress. The Constitution that the president took an oath to uphold provides that the duty of the president is to execute the laws passed by Congress, not to make his own law, or to extort favors before doing his duty. (The word “favor” is Mr. Trump’s characterization of what he was demanding.)
There is an argument that the president never used the words “Quid quo pro.” His supporters further argue that even if he did, it does not rise to the level of impeachment – that it is OK for a president to do that. (Imagine the howls if President Obama had done that.) This is clearly not OK.
I think there is another charge to be made. The administration of the laws is executed through the government agencies. The president is required to appoint secretaries for the agencies administering the laws who must then be confirmed by the Senate. This is another of the “checks and balances” to prevent the presidential abuse of power. These secretaries take an oath to preserve the constitution, not swear personal loyalty to the president.
Lawyers also take an oath when they are admitted to the bar, I believe, to keep their client’s affairs confidential and to work solely in the best interest of the client.
Rudi Giuliani was not working on behalf of the president of the United States; he was working for the person of Donald J. Trump, when he was negotiating with a foreign leader on behalf of Mr. Trump. Contacts on behalf of the United States government should be carried out by the State Department. There should never be negotiations for the individual’s personal interest by his personal attorney, using government funds to extort favors. The state-department officials who have testified were deeply troubled by this, although they focused on the message rather than the messenger.
The president seems to believe that there is no limit to his power. Mingling of his personal affairs with the office of president may be happening in other areas of his business, which he is carefully guarding from scrutiny. I believe many actions of the president are clearly impeachable, and failure to impeach is a dereliction of duty to uphold the constitution as all Congress people have sworn to do.
Judith Truesdell is a resident of Shelburne.