The Founders of our Constitution made it quite clear that they did want impeachment to be a partisan action to be taken by the House. Furthermore, they created a very high standard (2/3 majority in the Senate) to guard against this action actually resulting in the removal of a sitting President. Therefore, it should be undertaken only in extreme circumstances where there is an imminent danger to the country that cannot be addressed through the electoral process.
Can anyone dispute that the recent impeachment hearings and vote is anything but a political stunt put forward by the Democrats as a expression of dissatisfaction with the 2016 election results? Given that actual removal of President Trump has no chance of being agreed to by the Senate, doesn't this action contravene clear Constitutional intent? Or did its Founders really intend for impeachment to be used by a majority in the House merely to harass the President or other officials they don't like?
Does anyone seriously believe that President Trump constitutes an imminent danger to our country during the next eleven months? Or does he only represent an imminent danger to the Democrats? Which is more important to you?
Can anyone dispute that the recent impeachment hearings and vote is anything but a political stunt put forward by the Democrats as a expression of dissatisfaction with the 2016 election results? Given that actual removal of President Trump has no chance of being agreed to by the Senate, doesn't this action contravene clear Constitutional intent? Or did its Founders really intend for impeachment to be used by a majority in the House merely to harass the President or other officials they don't like?
Does anyone seriously believe that President Trump constitutes an imminent danger to our country during the next eleven months? Or does he only represent an imminent danger to the Democrats? Which is more important to you?