Charges Against Trump
With impeachment, Democrats are showing the president that no one is above the law
Despite downplaying the importance of the process—and even disparaging it by refusing to participate in the parts of the process held so far—U.S. President Donald Trump yesterday witnessed the formalization of a crucial step toward impeachment, a legal mechanism that, in theory, could culminate in his removal from the White House. The Democratic majority in the United States House of Representatives unveiled two articles upon which Congress will have to vote. This is a moment that highlights the institutional strength of the U.S., where its legislators reassert that—in the words of the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee—“No one, not even the president, is above the law.”
More specifically, Democrats are formally charging Trump with “high crimes and misdemeanors,” as well as with abuse of the office of the presidency for his own personal benefit and obstruction of the work of Congress during its investigations. These focus on potential pressures exerted by the U.S. president on his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, so that the European country would investigate the Ukrainian activities of the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, who has a good chance of becoming the Democratic presidential candidate in the 2020 election. That is to say, the challenger who can prevent Trump from continuing his presidency. The last point is particularly serious, as it entails involving a third country in the electoral process, a sensitive issue especially in the U.S., since Trump’s own 2016 victory was under suspicion precisely for potential foreign interference.
It should be emphasized that the hearings held before the House Intelligence Committee prior to this announcement were impeccable, both from a formal point of view and from the point of view of transparency. The depositions were broadcast live, and House representatives—both Republican and Democratic—tasked with questioning witnesses were given the opportunity for their opinions to reach the whole country. In contrast, Trump chose to attack testimonies against him—and those giving them—both via Twitter and in press gaggles where the president was standing so far away from journalists that he had to yell in order to be heard.
Even if removal from office ends up being rejected in a last and decisive vote in the Senate—where the Republican Party has the majority—the process has helped to prove that U.S. democracy will not tolerate an undignified use of its institutions without opposition and that the trust voters placed in the president is not a blank check, but a pledge of trust that cannot be broken without consequence.
Despite downplaying the importance of the process—and even disparaging it by refusing to participate in the parts of the process held so far—U.S. President Donald Trump yesterday witnessed the formalization of a crucial step toward impeachment, a legal mechanism that, in theory, could culminate in his removal from the White House. The Democratic majority in the United States House of Representatives unveiled two articles upon which Congress will have to vote. This is a moment that highlights the institutional strength of the U.S., where its legislators reassert that—in the words of the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee—“No one, not even the president, is above the law.”
More specifically, Democrats are formally charging Trump with “high crimes and misdemeanors,” as well as with abuse of the office of the presidency for his own personal benefit and obstruction of the work of Congress during its investigations. These focus on potential pressures exerted by the U.S. president on his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, so that the European country would investigate the Ukrainian activities of the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, who has a good chance of becoming the Democratic presidential candidate in the 2020 election. That is to say, the challenger who can prevent Trump from continuing his presidency. The last point is particularly serious, as it entails involving a third country in the electoral process, a sensitive issue especially in the U.S., since Trump’s own 2016 victory was under suspicion precisely for potential foreign interference.
It should be emphasized that the hearings held before the House Intelligence Committee prior to this announcement were impeccable, both from a formal point of view and from the point of view of transparency. The depositions were broadcast live, and House representatives—both Republican and Democratic—tasked with questioning witnesses were given the opportunity for their opinions to reach the whole country. In contrast, Trump chose to attack testimonies against him—and those giving them—both via Twitter and in press gaggles where the president was standing so far away from journalists that he had to yell in order to be heard.
Even if removal from office ends up being rejected in a last and decisive vote in the Senate—where the Republican Party has the majority—the process has helped to prove that U.S. democracy will not tolerate an undignified use of its institutions without opposition and that the trust voters placed in the president is not a blank check, but a pledge of trust that cannot be broken without consequence.
Next article![]( "The Paris Agreement and COP25: Let’s Resolve To Overcome the US Withdrawal")
