Home»Commentary»Senate Wants Air Tight Case For Impeachment Of Biden – They Aren’t Looking Hard

Senate Wants Air Tight Case For Impeachment Of Biden – They Aren’t Looking Hard

0
Shares
Pinterest WhatsApp

If the current flavor of politicians is the “best” that America has to offer, you should recognize we put a boat in the water, going up river, without a paddle. Former Congressman and now GOP Senator Markwayne Mullin stated on December 15, 2023, that Joe Biden could not be impeached for “actions” he took while Vice-President. So, if there was reasonable suspicion that Joe Biden committed murder while Vice President, or when not holding office, he couldn’t be impeached for that. Really?

What does the Constitution say? Article II, Section 4, of the Constitution for the united States of America states, “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” And, according to Publius Huldah, aka Joanna Martin – a retired attorney, “It is NOT necessary that the President, other officers in the executive branch, or federal judges commit a crime before they may be impeached and removed from office.” This is exactly what the Constitution says. Impeachment can be for treason, bribery OR other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Federalist Paper No. 66 (2nd para) & Federalist  No. 77 (last para) show that the President may be impeached & removed for encroachments, i.e., usurpations of power.

Federal judges may also be impeached & removed for usurpations of power (Federalist No. 81, 8th para).

Throughout The Federalist Papers, it is stated that impeachment is for “political offenses”.

2. The House has the SOLE power of impeachment (Art. I, Sec. 2, last clause).  The Senate has the SOLE power to try all impeachments (Art. I, Sec. 3, next to last clause).  The decision to convict is not reviewable by any other body – and common sense tells us what that means!  The House may impeach, and the Senate may convict, for any reason whatsoever; and their decision cannot be overturned.

3. The meaning of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” at Art. II, Sec. 4, is far broader than one might at first glance think.  Somewhere I saw a scholarly paper showing that the “high” refers to the status of the official – it does not refer to the severity of the offense.

Now, note well!  “Misdemeanor” has a broader meaning than “a lesser category of criminal offense”.  Webster’s 1828 Dictionary shows the primary meaning is:  “Ill behavior; evil conduct; fault; mismanagement.”

This shows that a President, Vice-president, and all civil Officers and Judges of the United States may be impeached, tried, convicted, and removed from office for “mismanagement”.

4. Errant members of Congress are never impeached – they are expelled by their respective Houses (Art. I, Sec. 5, cl. 2).

5. Military personnel are never impeached – they are court-martialed (see UCMJ – Uniform Code of Military Justice), and may be kicked out of the military as part of their punishment.  They also may be administratively discharged.

6. It is not feasible to criminally prosecute, under federal law, a sitting President: his prosecutors, the Attorney General and the U.S. Attorneys, all serve at the President’s pleasure.  He can fire anyone who dares to criminally prosecute him.  That is why sitting Presidents who have committed federal crimes must first be removed from office via impeachment, then be criminally prosecuted.  (Federalist No. 69, 4th para).

But do not forget: A President may – and should – be impeached & removed for usurpations of power, mismanagement, incompetence, or for any other reason deemed sufficient by Congress.

Where do these people holding office get their information? Wouldn’t it be egregious to the Constitution to have a liar, a bribery recipient, traitor, encroacher, or mismanaging individual holding the office of President, Vice President or other civil office to include judges? All of those are bad behaviors. As Ms. Martin has indicated, “The House may impeach, and the Senate may convict, for whatever reason whatsoever; and, their decision cannot be overturned.”

But, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, along with other Senators, is asking for “an airtight case.”

GOP senators have communicated to colleagues in the House of Representatives, “give us an airtight case,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), a former congressman, said during an appearance on Newsmax.

“We don’t want to play politics with impeaching a president like the Democrats did with Trump. So if they send us a case, make sure it’s convictable. And the bar’s real high, there’s no question about it, it’s got to be a misdemeanor, high crime, or treason, and the other part, it has to be committed while he was in office, the current office he holds,” he added.

The bar is not that high if you look at the definition of misdemeanor. According to The Epoch Times, impeachment conviction requires a “supermajority” in the Senate; Democrats hold 51 seats. However, the Constitution for the united States of America states otherwise at Article I, Section 3, clause 6 – “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” [Emphasis Mine.] Doesn’t sound like a “supermajority”, but a “yes” to convict vote of two thirds of present members.

Sen. Mullin has his position based upon the scenario that occurred during the presidential term of Richard Nixon.

Evan Davis, who worked for the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry when the House was investigating President Richard Nixon, said that impeachment has to be for offenses committed while in office as president.

“After detailed study, we concluded that ‘because impeachment of a President is a grave step for the nation, it is to be predicated only upon conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office.’ What does that then preclude?” he wrote in an op-ed. “First, it requires that a president be impeached only for offenses committed while serving as president. There can be no violation of the constitutional duties of the presidential office until one becomes president.”

So, according to Evan Davis, a president can commit murder before he is president but not be impeached for it because impeachment of the president is “a grave step for the nation” and should be “only for offenses committed while serving as president.” Where does the Constitution say that? As we have already established, “a President may – and should – be impeached & removed for usurpations of power, mismanagement, incompetence, or for any other reason deemed sufficient by Congress.”

Let’s review what Davis stated in his op-ed at The Hill.

First, it requires that a president be impeached only for offenses committed while serving as president. There can be no violation of the constitutional duties of the presidential office until one becomes president. Moreover, the weight of historical precedent is key in fixing the scope of impeachable offenses: The four presidential impeachments and 15 judicial impeachments have all been for conduct while in office. 

Yet there is talk on Capitol Hill of impeaching President Biden for actions taken either while vice president or in the four years between his terms as vice president and then president. As shown, the Constitution does not envision a president being put out of office for something that took place before he was elected to the office. Similarly, American voters should not be disenfranchised based on actions taken by an individual before being elected president. There are other legal remedies for such actions.

[Would you want an individual who committed any crime, but was never charged or brought to trial, holding the office of president? Any reasonable individual would say “no” as it goes to character, which means crimes could occur during the individual’s tenure as president.]

Second, it requires that a “high” crime or misdemeanor was committed. Here again, talk on Capitol Hill includes impeaching President Biden for actions that do not rise to that level.

[As we have established, “misdemeanor” has a broad meaning – ill behavior, evil conduct, fault, mismanagement. There is reasonable suspicion Biden is a pedophile based on his daughter’s diary and his affinity to “sniff” children. Would you want a possible pedophile holding the office of president? What about Joe’s affinity for lying? He has lied to the people while holding the office of president. Is this not “ill behavior”?]

One claimed ground for impeaching Biden, for instance, is that as vice president he conditioned aid to Ukraine on the firing of a corrupt prosecutor to help a Ukrainian company on whose board his son served. Putting aside the problem of basing presidential impeachment on conduct as vice president and the factual implausibility and speculative nature of this claim, the alleged conduct is not a crime or the abusive solicitation of a personal benefit in return for official action.

[Does this not speak to Joe’s character? If he used the office of Vice President inappropriately, it would go to reason he would do it as president.]

Even making the improbable assumption that Biden’s judgment was influenced by his son’s interests, there would not even be an ethics violation. Government rules of ethics proscribe conflicts of interest based on the activities of spouses, domestic partners and dependent children, but not grown children.

[“Rules” are not laws. Because of Biden being “compromised” by his son’s activities in the past, would it not be prudent to say he is compromised now because of those activities, which would open him up to blackmail, extortion, etc.? Moreover, wouldn’t the billions of dollars sent to Ukraine constitute “mismanagement? And, Biden “dangling” increased border security, that really isn’t, in exchange for more money to be funneled to Ukraine, as a sort of “bribe” to Congress, when he should be faithfully executed the law as required by the Constitution?]

Another claimed ground for impeaching Biden is that he has failed to secure America’s Southern border. This is simply a policy dispute — there is no crime involved. If all that is required for impeachment is a difference of opinion over policy, then any Congress controlled by one party could remove a president of another party just for differing on policy. Democracy would be gone.

Here is the current fault of Biden – he has not taken care that the laws be faithfully executed as established in Article II, Section 3. “Policy” is not law and the crossing of individuals across the border of the united States, outside of the established law for immigration and naturalization, is a crime. Moreover, the united States of America is a republic, not a democracy. Moreover, the Constitution guarantees to each State that the united States “… shall protect each of them against invasion …” per Article IV, Section 4. That has not been done, meaning the laws have not been faithfully executed.

Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution for the united States of America states, “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” With all the reporting on the illegal alien invasion of the US borders, the $1 billion dollars sent to an organization accused of harboring terrorists, and the “aid and comfort” Joe has given Iran through appeasement, it satisfies the “testimony of two witnesses to the same over act” to impeach Biden currently for treason and actions occurring under the Constitution.

But, here’s the caveat. “Mr. Mullin said he’s spoken with some Democrat colleagues and that five moderate Democrats, whom he declined to identify, would ‘definitely be looking to convict’ if the case were strong.”

So, again, the unconstitutional parties are playing fast and loose with the Constitution. If Congress deems Biden’s prior conduct sufficient for impeachment, then Congress can impeach. However, if Senators want an “airtight case” against Biden for offenses committed while in office, they don’t have to look very hard, as has been shown. The point is they are NOT looking. Why? Members in office of both unconstitutional parties would have to implicate themselves in all these crimes arising under the Constitution committed by Biden.

Unless Americans get off their duffs, we are definitely up the river without a paddle.


Suzanne Hamner

Suzanne Hamner (pen name) is a registered nurse, grandmother of 4, and a political independent residing in the state of Georgia, who is trying to mobilize the Christian community in her area to stand up and speak out against tyrannical government, invasion by totalitarian political systems masquerading as religion and get back to the basics of education.
Previous post

‘Conquered’: Minnesota’s New Flag Bears a Strong Resemblance to THIS Flag

Next post

Congress’ ‘Gift’ to America This Christmas