Trump Can’t Be Put on Trial, but He Can Be Impeached

Published in El Financiero
(Mexico) on 24 August 2018
by Raul Fernández de Castro M. (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Nick Dauster. Edited by Barbara Finkemeyer.
The president is not subject to everyday justice. For that reason, despite the evidence that his conduct was criminal during the 2016 election, he will not be put on trial. But he can be subjected to an impeachment trial. That depends on what happens in the next midterm elections on Nov. 6, in which the House of Representatives could be completely replaced, along with a third of the Senate. If the Democrats obtain a majority in the House of Representatives, the possibility of impeachment casts a great shadow over the last two years of Donald Trump’s first four-year term.

Tuesday, Aug. 18, was a black day for Trump. Two close collaborators, Michael Cohen, his attorney and fixer, and Paul Manafort, chairman of his election campaign, were found guilty.

Cohen clearly slung mud at Trump: “I acted in this way… with the principal idea of influencing the election," adding, “in the summer of 2016, in coordination with, and under the direction of a candidate for federal office, I and the president of a media campaign, at the request of the candidate, worked together to prevent an individual from publicly disseminating information that would be damaging to the candidate and the campaign."* In August 2016, a Playboy model, who had sold the rights to her story to a tabloid, received $150,000 for those rights. A few weeks before the election, the porn star known as Stormy Daniels received a payment of $130,000.

Presidential immunity in the United States has been a complex theme to work out. In 1973, Assistant Attorney General Robert G. Dixon, who was in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice, issued a memorandum, which was released one month before the well-known “Saturday night massacre,” the famous Oct. 20 on which then-President Richard Nixon ordered the firing of the independent special prosecutor, Archibald Cox.

In his memorandum, Dixon concluded that the president should not be put on trial. Such an occurrence would “hamstring the operation of the whole governmental apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs.” Without a doubt, the process would stain the office that is a symbol and guide for the nation, and be “a politically and constitutionally traumatic event” for the country.

Two decades later, in 1998, when Bill Clinton was being investigated for his exploits with Monica Lewinsky, the Dixon memorandum of 1973 was reaffirmed: The president cannot be put on trial.

In the same vein, Trump will not be put on trial, despite evidence of his conduct during the campaign.

Trump and his administration have vehemently attacked the conduct of Special Counsel Robert Mueller regarding Russian involvement in the presidential election, describing it as nothing more than a witch hunt. But the consensus in Washington is that Cohen and Manafort’s sentences complicate Trump’s firing of Mueller. In addition, a recent Fox News poll reveals that 59 percent of voters approve of the investigation, which represents an 11 percent gain over last month.

Given that an indictment isn’t viable, Trump’s future will be defined by the next midterm elections.

An impeachment trial begins in the House of Representatives. A legislator must introduce a resolution to put the president on trial for charges that involve “treason, bribery, and other high crimes or misdemeanors.” In such a case, the House examines the charges and votes in favor of, or against, a trial. If the vote is favorable, the process becomes a trial in the Senate, over which the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides. At the end of the trial, the Senate votes to decide the future of the president. For a president to be removed, a two-thirds majority of qualified votes is required. If the president is removed, the vice president becomes president.

For that scenario to be viable, the Democrats must triumph in the next midterm elections. The Republicans have the majority in both houses. In the House of Representatives, the Republicans have an advantage of 36 seats, and in the Senate, of just one.

The polls are clear. Both Republicans and Democrats have enormous incentives. The former, because Trump, despite all his troubles and criminal acts, has done everything and more that his base wants. The Democrats, because they are well aware that Trump is finishing off all of Barack Obama’s accomplishments, such as the right to universal health care, energy efficiency and the framework of the United States’ relationship to the world.

It looks like it will be difficult for the Democrats to triumph. Not impossible. Generally, Democrats participate less than Republicans. Still, the loathing that Trump inspires makes me feel optimistic.

*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, the source of this quote could not be independently verified.



El presidente no es sujeto de la justicia cotidiana. Por eso a pesar de la evidencia que tuvo una conducta criminal durante la campaña electoral del 2016, no puede ser enjuiciado. Sí puede ser sometido a un juicio de desafuero (impeachment). Esto depende de lo que suceda en la próxima elección de medio término (6 de noviembre) en que será renovada la Cámara baja en su totalidad y una tercera parte del Senado. Si los demócratas llegan a obtener mayoría en la Cámara de Representantes, la posibilidad de un impeachment será una gran sombra durante los dos últimos años de su primer cuatrienio.
El martes de esta semana fue un día negro para Trump. Dos cercamos colaboradores fueron encontrados culpables. Michael Cohen, su abogado y coyote (fixer) y Paul Manafort, presidente de su campaña electoral.
Cohen, claramente embarró a Trump: “actué de esa manera… con el propósito principal de influir en la elección”. Agregando, “en el verano de 2016, en coordinación, y bajo la dirección de, un candidato a la oficina federal, yo y el presidente de una empresa de medios de comunicación a petición del candidato trabajamos juntos para impedir que un individuo divulgara públicamente información que sería dañina para el candidato y la campaña”. En agosto de 2016 una modelo de Playboy, quien ya había vendido los derechos a un tabloide, recibió un pago de 150 mil dólares por los derechos. A escasas semanas de la elección, la estrella de porno mejor conocida como Stormy Daniels recibió un pago de 130 mil dólares.
La inmunidad del Ejecutivo en Estados Unidos ha sido un tema complejo de descifrar. En 1973, el subprocurador, Robert G. Dixon, encargado de la oficina de asesoría jurídica del Departamento de Justicia emitió un memorándum, dado a conocer un mes antes de la conocida “masacre del sábado por la noche”; el famoso 20 de octubre en el que el entonces presidente, Richard Nixon, ordenó el despido del fiscal independiente, Archibald Cox.
En su memorándum, Dixon concluyó que el presidente no debería de ser enjuiciado. Tal hecho “frustraría el funcionamiento de todo el aparato gubernamental, tanto en el exterior como en el interior”. A todas luces, el proceso mancharía la oficina símbolo y guía de la nación y sería “política y constitucionalmente un evento traumático” para el país.
Dos décadas después, en 1998, cuando se llevaba a cabo la investigación de Bill Clinton sobre sus andanzas con Mónica Lewinsky, se reafirmó el memorándum Dixon de 1973: el presidente no puede ser enjuiciado.
De la misma manera Trump no será enjuiciado, no obstante la evidencia de su actuación criminal durante la campaña.
Trump y su gobierno han atacado con vehemencia la actuación del fiscal especial Robert Mueller sobre la involucración rusa en la campaña electoral: “no es más que una cacería de brujas”. Pero el consenso en Washington es que las sentencias a Cohen y Manafort le complican a Trump correrlo. Incluso, una reciente encuesta de Fox News revela que 59 por ciento de los electores aprueban de la investigación, lo que significa un aumento de 11 puntos en relación al mes pasado.
Dado que el enjuiciamiento no es viable, el futuro de Trump se definirá en la próxima elección de medio término.
Un juicio de desafuero empieza en la Cámara de Representantes. Un legislador debe presentar una resolución para enjuiciar al presidente por cargos que impliquen “traición, soborno u otros altos crímenes o delitos menores”. De ser el caso, el recinto legislativo evaluaría los cargos y vota a favor o en contra del juicio. En caso de un voto favorable, el proceso se convertirá en un juicio en el Senado, que presidiría el jefe de la Corte Suprema. Al terminar el juicio, el Senado emite su voto para decidir el futuro del presidente. Para que el presidente sea destituido, se requieren un voto calificado de dos terceras partes. De ser destituido, el vicepresidente asume el cargo.
Para que este escenario sea viable, se requiere que los demócratas arrasen en las próximas elecciones de medio término. Los republicanos tienen mayoría en ambas cámaras. En la baja los republicanos aventajan por 36 curules y en el Senado sólo por una.
Las encuestas no son claras. Ambos, republicanos y demócratas tienen enormes incentivos. Los primeros porque Trump, a pesar de todos sus pesares y actos criminales, le ha cumplido con creces a sus base. Los demócratas porque están conscientes que Trump está acabando con todos los logros de Obama, como el derecho a la salud universal, la eficiencia energética y la marca Estados Unidos en el mundo.
El triunfo demócrata se ve difícil. No imposible. Generalmente son menos participativos que las huestes republicanas. Sin embargo, los odios que despierta Trump, me hacen sentir optimista.

This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Venezuela: The Devil in Los Angeles

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Mexico: Migration: A Political Crisis?

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Topics

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Venezuela: The Devil in Los Angeles

Germany: Donald Trump’s Military Intervention in LA Is a Planned Escalation

Mexico: Migration: A Political Crisis?

Poland: Los Angeles Riots: Battle for America’s Future

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Related Articles

Germany: Donald Trump’s Military Intervention in LA Is a Planned Escalation

Switzerland: US Travel Bans: On Immigration Policy, Trump Is Anything but Erratic

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Israel: The President Who Forgot History: Trump Blames Biden for Wave of Antisemitism