I have previously written about the endless calls for impeachment from Democratic members for everything from Trump criticizing NFL players to comments made about protesters to his reference to “shithole countries.” The Framers saw the great abuses caused not only by tyranny of nobility, but tyranny of the majority. They sought to insulate our government from the transient impulses of politics. The danger has been repeatedly shown by members who see virtually any act or comment by Donald Trump as a case for impeachment. It is a trend toward what I have called “the no-confidence impeachment” option and it is not only an abuse of our constitutional standard but a dangerous trend for this country. The latest grounds for impeachment was stated by former Breitbart spokesperson Kurt Bardella who was also spokesperson for Rep. Darrell Issa, Rep. Brian Bilbray and Senator Olympia Snowe. It appears that the failure to take additional actions or “accept” the fact of Russian interference is now grounds for impeachment and removal from office. His article appears in USA Today entitled President Trump’s Russia Denialism Is Grounds For Impeachment. (For full disclosure, I also write for USA Today).
Bardella writes in USA Today that, despite the agreement of his own intelligence officials, Trump has remained “skeptical.” He added:
“Trump’s refusal to accept the consensus of his own national security team seems to be the definition of “adhering to” our “Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” His state of denial of emboldens America’s enemies to continue their attacks against our democratic process, and makes him a willing accomplice in their efforts to undermine our republic.”
The White House has repeatedly objected to the claim that Trump has called the Russian interference a “hoax” as opposed to the allegation of collusion with his campaign — most recently yesterday. There is no question that Trump has muddled the message and could be stronger in his condemnation. However, the notion that a president can be impeached for his policies judgments on what to say and do about a threat is a highly destabilizing notion. Trump supporters long criticized President Obama for not doing enough about Russia including the interference with our elections that began in 2014. Should he have been impeached?
Bardella asks “What is the point of having a free republic, if the president turns a blind eye to outside interference from a foreign power?” The answer is that the free republic allows us to choose our president, not dictate what choices he will make. That is the core element to a representative democracy as opposed to a pure democracy.
The concept of discretion runs deeply in our laws. Under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), officials have qualified immunity for discretionary acts. The discretionary function exception in 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a) allows public officials to make negligent decisions by commission or omission like Janet Reno’s disastrous decision to attack the Waco Compound in the Davidian tragedy.
Likewise, courts regularly refuse to intervene on policy decisions and would never entertain a challenge to force a president “to do more” on an issue of foreign relations.
To use impeachment as such a vehicle would render the constitution incomprehensible but it is a sign of the distemper that has taken over our discourse. I respect Bardella’s concerns for this country and his objections to Trump’s approach. Indeed, I may share some of those concerns but this is a question for the political not constitutional process.
126 thoughts on “Former Breitbart Spokesperson: Trump’s Lack Of Response To The Russians Is An Impeachable Offense”
Whatever Jonathan writes or contributes to
Is good enough for me.
Always interested in a genuine professional opinion.
Turley the best.
Just watched a debate between 2 Pulitizer Prize winning journalists on Trump Russia MSM issues – James Risen and Glenn Greenwald. Unsurprisingly Greenwald rocked!
Trump this. Trump that.
We need to discuss why the prosecutor in that Florida County did not invoke the civil commitment law and lock the wacko up for treatment because he was mentally ill and posed a threat to self or others.
Trump will be found to be in the debt of the Russian mafia. Trump’s relation to the American mafia opened that door. Trump’s personal lawyer Roy Cohn was a liaison for his American mob contacts. The Russian mafia made terrific inroads into the US mafia decades ago. I am certain Mueller already knows this.
All of the disparate facts about Trump start to make sense when you see him as a Russian mob agent. From his failure to release his taxes, the Russian real estate gaffes, the Manafort hire, the Russian / wikileaks compliance, the manifestly positive Pro Trump hacking and propaganda, the Russian hacking attacks on Clinton, and the cosmetic anti-Trump Russian efforts after the election…all make sense if president trump is a puppet of the Russian mob that runs the Russian government. Or else he’s just a fortunate SOB, the beneficiary of Russian cyber attacks and Russian purchases of inflated priced realty.
Putin is also a puppet of the Russian mafia / oligarchs. He and Trump have that in common.
I’m certain Turley will discover the bright side of this infamy. That’s what he’s paid to do.
“Trump will be found to be in the debt of the Russian mafia.”
You need to contact the FBI with this information
The ONE that Mueller and his coherts SHOULD be investigating would be Hillary Clinton, who WAS the one who benefitted by $145 MILLION DOLLARS that was ‘Money Laundered to her Fake Charity.” WHY is Trump responsible for ‘Bad Russian Actors, when SHE is the one who benefitted, along with Bill given the $500,000 per one speech while She was SOS? This whole deal STINKS to high heaven, as she AND Obama gave Russia 20% of American Uranium, and it appears that Mueller was a “Bag Man, early on in ’09, so it seems “LOGICAL THAT HE IS PROTECTING HIMSELF, COMEY, OBAMA AND THE REST OF THE CORRUPT DEMOCRATS.” Let’s GET REAL here folks, they Expected Hillary to Waltz into the Whitehouse and NONE of this money scheming by her/DNC/Podesta(who received $35 Million from the Uranium Deal)
would have SEEN THE LIGHT OF DAY.
IF Sessions does NOT have the Balz to ‘Investigate the REAL ‘Colluders, then Trump NEEDS TO REPLACE HIM, as the RUSH to push Mueller(Comey’s Pal) into the Special Prosecutor’s position, was like ‘Magic” done quickly, and they were ALL trying to cover up for Obama/Hillary, etal…like McCabe, Ohr, and the REST OF THESE “CORRUPTIBLES”…………..DON’T try to continue to “give these people a PASS, and tell us that there is NO CRIME BY THE DEMOCRATS, AND OBAMA’S REGIME.” You INSULT our Intelligence and WE Expect Justice to be done….STOP PLAYING GAMES, AS THE DISHONESTY OF THE OBAMA REGIME, HAS MANY TIMES, SPOKEN “VOLUMES.”
BTS: To get the Judge to allow this to move forward, WITHOUT telling him that it was Hillary AND the DNC that wanted Americans Spyed on, to get the fisa involved is in itself a VIOLATION. I want to hear about WHAT excuse was used (IN WRITING) to get that ‘Judge to OK this, and Come ABOARD(3 times, as I understand w/Comey doing the requests) What is the Judge’s Name, his affiliation, and WHY are we NOT hearing about HOW they got him to comply? ANSWERS, PLEASE…..!
BTW: “Why are the “Bad Russian Actors, the ONLY ones that Mueller charged?” Is this because THEY cannot be charged/jailed being in Russia…..WHY is the DNC/Hillary NOT charged for being the Ones who trumped up the “Phony Dossier on POTUS, Trump- You THINK THIS MUELLER MOVE IS NOT TO HAVE EVERYONE JUST GIVE HILLARY, ‘ANOTHER PASS?” JUST AS COMEY DID THE FIRST TIME, WHEN HE MADE UP HIS MIND TO EXONERATE HER, BEFORE HE EVEN QUESTIONED HER? WHAT A BUNCH OF “CORRUPT AGENCIES, THAT ARE PROMOTING THEIR ‘OWN, AND CIRCLEING THE WAGONS….AGAIN, AS USUAL.” THIS IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE, AS NO ONE ELSE WOULD GET AWAY WITH ALL THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF “THE CLINTON CRIME FAMILY”….LET’S GET REAL HERE!
Great theory except for one thing. The Clinton Foundation is a public charity. Sort of shoots your whole conspiracy to hell.
And Comey is a lifelong republican.
And Clinton had no power to unilaterally approve / reject the sale of uranium.
And Mueller is a lifelong republican appointed by a republican congress.
And HRC conspired with the Russians to undermine her own campaign with leaked emails?
And HRC conspired with Comey and Strzok to undermine her campaign with the reopening of the criminal investigation of her handling of emails just before the election?
I think I’m done here.
I don’t even have to touch the FISC and FISA warrants to discredit your obviously sloppy, incoherent, and biased mess of an argument.
Let’s say Trump is a Police Captain and gangsters are freely operating rackets in his district. And let’s say Trump’s Lieutenants and Sergeants freely acknowledge the rackets. The media is also covering these rackets. But Trump, the theoretical Captain of this district, keeps denying the rackets exist. In almost any city, a Police Captain like that would be considered either corrupt or incompetent. Which would undoubtedly lead to them getting thrown off the force.
Nice try Peter, do you feel the same way about Hillary, who as SOS, was “Taking in Millions from ANY Nation, Any Person, who would “Pay to Play-were SHE to become POTUS?” Doubt It…but Keep up the BS.
Why should Hillary matter here?? Why is it every time someone points out something peculiar about Trump, they must answer for some alleged misdeed by Hillary or Obama?? And these alleged misdeeds, by the way, are always some ‘scandal ginned up by right-wing media.
Why is it every time someone points out something peculiar about Trump, they must answer for some alleged misdeed by Hillary or Obama??
It’s called the rule of law. Objective truth. Just government. Notice how you don’t use the word alleged regarding Trump but you do for Clinton and Obama. Being objective, there is actually more evidence available to remove alleged from Clinton than from Trump. And no, I won’t provide you what that evidence is. If you fail to see it now, then nothing I provide you would make a difference.
Now *two* good reasons to avoid USA Today.
Dr. Benson, are you insinuating that Turley’s disclosure that he also writes for USA Today is the other of your two reasons to avoid reading USA Today?
Comments are closed.