While there were murmurs about “impeaching” Donald Trump from almost the moment he was sworn in on January 20, few expected the proposal would be raised in the House of Congress as early as it did – yesterday. Representative Al Green, Democrat of Texas justified his call because he claimed President Trump had “obstructed justice”.
He was referring to a memo sent by Trump to then FBI Director James Comey, to drop the agency’s investigation into Mike Flynn, for not disclosing his contacts with a Russian diplomat at his confirmation hearing as National Security Advisor. Comey was subsequently fired by Trump. The memo was published by the New York Times and more pertinently, the Republican chair of the House Oversight Committee, Jason Chaffetz, has officially asked the FBI to turn over all documents and recordings of communications between Comey and Trump to determine the extent to which the latter might have attempted to thwart the investigation.
This week had opened with a Washington Post article claiming Trump had divulged highly classified material about ISIS operations to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, in an Oval Office meeting the previous week. The material allowed the Russians to very easily pinpoint US intelligence assets in the Middle East and was related to the US ban on laptops on flights from Europe and several other countries. After denying that sensitive information was divulged, Trump in his usual style reversed gear and claimed the information was not as sensitive as claimed; he wanted to save lives and he was within his rights to do so.
The question now arises as to whether Trump can actually be impeached. While the US Constitution is very clear in stating that a President “shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanours”, the determination of which of Trump’s actions constitute “high crimes or misdemeanours” is critical. Another tact that could be taken would be to prove that Trump has violated his oath of office to “preserve, protect, and defend” the US Constitution, when he divulged sensitive intelligence.
The impeachment process begins in the House of Representatives (HoR), where an independent investigation would be conducted and then handed over to the House Judiciary Committee. The HJC will review and debate the evidence, and if a majority votes for it, writes up the Articles of Impeachment. From there, the latter are sent to the full House and if voted by a majority then sent to the Senate where the real trial is held. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court acts as the Judge and the Senate, the jury. The President will mount his defence and the House Judiciary Committee will act as the prosecution. If a two-thirds majority in the Senate votes against the President, he is removed from office.
As Guyanese observe the rule of law being applied in the US with Trump possibly soon having to face impeachment as did Presidents Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon in recent decades. Clinton was exonerated primarily because the Senate was controlled by the Democratic Party as is the Senate, presently controlled by Republicans. Clinton, however, had massive popularity ratings while Trump is sinking and Republicans might not be as willing to take their chances at the next Senate elections.
In Guyana, we also have a similar procedure for impeaching a sitting President which is stipulated in Article 180. A motion alleging that the President has committed any violation of the Constitution or any gross misconduct must be laid and have the support of the majority of the National Assembly. There is a growing body of legal opinion that President Granger’s own actions in seeking to unilaterally interpret the Constitution and his unequivocal support for members of his executive, especially his Attorney General, in violating the separation of powers doctrine which is an integral aspect of our constitutional basic structure, might lead to a constitutional crisis that would precipitate an impeachment motion.
