It’s The Precedent Not The President

I’m writing so far ahead of publishing that I risk being out over my skis but if things are working out the way they project as I’m penning this the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump should be starting soon. I have some guidance for the “jurors” as well as an explanation why I put that word in quotation marks. Let’s explore.  

I’ll start with the explanation. If this were a real jury trial all 100 Senators would never be seated. All know too much about the case and many have already publicly expressed an opinion as to the verdict. Also in a regular trial the judge, not the majority of the jury, controls the process. All that aside, this is what the Constitution calls for and like it or not it is what we are stuck with.

Trump has committed a lot of sins in office and he shows no sign of slowing down. It appeared he shows no signs of changing his behavior despite Russiagate and Ukrainegate. If he is not removed by the Senate (I’m sure he and his minions will say “Exonerated”) he will only get bolder in his misdeeds.

America is a representative democracy; a system of government where the elected officials derive their power from the people, not the other way around. The main mechanism for the people to hold their elected officials to account is the election. If a federal official is not faithfully discharging their duties we get to vote them out every two, four or six years depending on the term of their office.

The Founders were especially warry of a corrupt President because so much power is vested in that position. They gave us impeachment where a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate can remove the President from office during their term. There is no such constitutional provision for removing a member of the House or Senate. They are one of 100 or 435, therefore their power is significantly less and we can wait for the next election.

There is reason to believe that President Trump conspired with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election that he won in a relatively narrow Electoral College upset. Now we have evidence of his enticing or inviting at least three foreign countries to interfere in the 2020 election. In at least the case of Ukraine he abused the powers of his office in an effort to extort their cooperation.

I have mixed feelings on the narrowness of the articles of impeachment but I fall back on my long time observation that to evaluate the Trump administration you have to view it as an organized criminal enterprise. When law enforcement busts a high ranking mobster they never get them on all their wrongdoings. They are satisfied to get them on one or two crimes serious enough to put them away for a long time. We have to view Don Trump the same way. If we have a sufficient charge to remove him from office we have to consider our job done.

Free and fair elections are the very foundation of a representative democracy. If we allow the president to interfere in that process we are no longer a democracy. Policy differences aside that is what is at stake in this impeachment. If we allow Trump to stay in office we will have set the precedent that a president can cheat to get reelected. By not removing Trump we will have established the precedent that any future president can use the power of their office and the assets “at their disposal” to enhance their electoral prospects regardless of its effect on national security and liberty around the world.

Why would any responsible, patriotic Senator set that precedent in order to save an individual president? Senators, you publically swore an oath to the Constitution, not to Donald Trump. Are you really willing to sell out your country and your integrity?

This article was written well ahead of publishing in order to accommodate my year end hiatus and is the property of Its content may not be used without citing the source. It may not be reproduced without the permission of Larry Marciniak.



One thought on “It’s The Precedent Not The President”

  1. The questions you ask at the end beg my typical response: “Don’t ask rhetorical questions.” And we need to be strong enough to challenge precedents when the situation warrants. Mueller should have challenged the DOJ policy by indicting the president. There is spinelessness aplenty to go around.

Comments are closed.