Impeaching By The Gross? Green Says House Could Impeach Trump Repeatedly

We have previously discussed Rep. Al Green’s remarkably low and fluid standard for impeachable offenses. It now appears to be not only low and fluid but repetitive. On Thursday, the Texas Democrat said on C-Span that a “president can be impeached more than once” and that there is “no limit” to how times the House might want to impeach Trump. In my testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, I warned that this incomplete record would lend itself to a type of impulse-buy impeachment. Green’s remarks raises the specter of not just impulsive but compulsive impeachments.

Green stated “I think that the Mueller report has some issues in it that ought to be considered. I think the obstruction of the Comey investigation has issues that should be considered, and I think the invidious discrimination that I have called to the attention of the public ought to be considered,”

He added:

“My hope is we will expand this and take up additional issues. I would also say this for your viewers, for edification purposes — a president can be impeached more than once. So we can do this — we can move forward with what we have on the table currently. We can take this before the Senate, and we can still investigate other issues, and when the president has committed additional offenses — and my suspicion is that he will — we can take those before the Senate.”

“There is no limit on the number of the times the Senate can vote to convict or not [convict] a president. No limit to the number of times a House can vote to impeach, or not, a president. So my belief is that the speaker will probably say we are going to move forward with what we have now, but we are not going to end investigations and that there may be a possible opportunity to do other things at a later time.”

Given the short (and in my view insufficient) investigation on the current issues, it is doubtful that Green’s concept of impeaching early and often would appeal to Speaker Pelosi.

211 thoughts on “Impeaching By The Gross? Green Says House Could Impeach Trump Repeatedly”

  1. One thing about congressman Green. He’s the most honest democrat out there right now. This a political hit. If you can impeach a sitting president with very little or nothing substantive, then in future years more presidents will be impeached. This is not a good road to go down. If Donald Trump is to be removed from office it should be in 2020, by an election.

  2. The Indian burning homicide was so heartbreaking.

    In order for crimes against women to decrease, the culture has to change. There is a long history of murdering, and even burning women to death. Bride burning. Burning your wife so that you can marry another and get another dowry. Assaults on women. There are laws, but how do you change a culture?

  3. I read a book recently, “Stalin-the court of the red czar” and I’ve read 1984 (years ago) and this ‘trial’ reminds my of the show trials of the 1930’s in the USSR. The party could do no wrong, period. Any deviation was punished with expulsion from the party (at the least) and Stalin would probably kill you later. Professor Turley is being treated like the ‘traitors’ of the Communist party were treated back then. The papers would have these blazing headlines (like today) and the ‘2 minute hate (from “1984”-Orwell) that’s in this thing too.
    I hope this ‘thing’ works out. I can’t think of anyway ‘out’ of this mess, except for the culpable people to be punished (if that’s legally possible-but not by this ‘impeachment’s standards) and the democrat party to take a HUGE loss at the 2020 elections. We live in ‘interesting times’ (apparently a Chinese curse-“may you live in interesting times”).
    But I could be (hopefully) wrong-I remember my grandfather saying that the world was going to hell then (1970’s) and I feel now what he must have felt then.

  4. Mr. Turley is very much out on a limb since no other constitutional scholar apparently in the entire country agrees with his assessment. Turley’s rejection of the constitutionality of impeaching the president for his offenses, particularly holding congressionaly-approved military support like a twisted arm until he got what he wanted for his personal political aims, defies ordinary logic. That is to say that you don’t need to be a constitutional scholar to understand that point. If anyone were to actually hear Green speak on the matter cited here, that of impeaching this criminal president again, that person would comprehend that Green’s point is that number 45 commits so many crimes that there will no doubt be more to impeach him for in the future should he managed to wiggle out of this current fix he is in. The only slippery slope we see before us is not congresses desire to endlessly impeach Presidents, it is rather this president’s insatiable appetite for committing crimes including terrible acts violence against refugees that have been called rightfully human rights abuses. Green who is speaking to the irrepressible need of this president to defy the law and defy the requirements of the office to which he swore an oath. For those in this comment thread cool, without any basis in fact, insist that America got what it wants because of Democratic politicians abuse of the Republicans, I have only laughter. your comments remind me of the abusive husband who points to the bruised and bloody spouse and says, “she made me do it”. The GOP is the party of white supremacy and corporate greed. It wasn’t always that way, but now it is. It is clear by now that anyone who thinks otherwise either suffers from a mental disease like the President or fails to possess basic literacy, also like the President.

    1. You don’t speak for every other constitutional scholar, guy. You’re opinion has just been thrown in the garbage when you start off with such an asinine and fictitious statement.

    2. Professor Turley was the ONLY objective legal scholar on the panel. With regard to your comments on this article, the very thought of spending the first two years of President Trump’s second term in impeachment “inquiries” will be the very thing that returns the House to Republican control in the 2020 election.

    3. “Constitutional Scholar”

      – The Mexican, aka Hispanophile
      __________________________

      If one understands and speaks the language, one does not need an “interpreter.”

      For example, all of the Mexicans who have invaded California don’t understand or speak English and are provided an interpreter, at taxpayer expense, to accomplish governmental business and assure their maximum acquisition of taxpayer funded “free stuff” and the ability to vote, as treasonous as that is. The anti-Constitution communists in America have made sure of that.

      The Constitution, by contrast, was written in plain English and is understandable by all. For example, in the 5th Amendment, the right to private property is not qualified and is absolute. Private means not public in any way, shape or form. Congress cannot legislate any form of possession or disposition of the private property of individuals with the sole exception of “taking” it by eminent domain, laws agaisnt property damage and bodily injury notwithstanding.

      Article 1, Section 8, which provides Congress the power to tax ONLY for “…general Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for any form of individual welfare, aka redistribution of wealth. General means all. Welfare means well proceed. General Welfare consists of facilities which all citizens use in similar amounts and frequency.

      Article 1, Section 8, enumerates the powers of Congress to regulate and that power is severely restricted to the “value” of “money” and “…[to] regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes;…” for the sole purpose of precluding any favor or bias by one over another; no other regulation or form of regulation being constitutional. Free market industries self-regulate to avoid litigation, insolvency and bankruptcy. Article 1, Section 8 protects the immunites of citizens from taxation and regulation by government.

      The Constitution, as scholars and citizens may read, provides maximal freedom to individuals while it severely limits and restricts government, constraining it to the role of facilitating the maximal freedom of individuals through the provision merely of security and infrastructure. The American Founders established the People as the “Sovereign” and the government as the “Subject.” The communists in America have crimianlly derprived citizens of their crucial constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities.

      “Decisions” by the judicial branch may be correct and constitutional or they may be erroneous, subjective, corrupt, malicious and unconstitutional – Chief Justice Roberts finding Obamacare constitutional being one such aberration and treasonous act. The judicial branch has absolutely NO power to legislate or modify the Constitution and decisions and precedents by the judicial branch that do so are treasonous and their decisions are only legitimate when they support and perpetuate the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution which all Americans can read. Members of the judicial branch are among the “…civil officers of the United States,…” which are eminently impeachable under Article 2, Section 4 which 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.”
      _____________________________________________________________________________________________

      “…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”

      “[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

      – Alexander Hamilton
      _________________

      “Constitutional Scholar” indeed.

      Americans who can read are all constitutional scholars.

    4. hispanophile,

      For one calling on reason and logic you should try and obtain some information rather than accept testimony from a witness who saw and hear nothing.

      Of the many scholars I assure there is at least one who has studied the constitution and understands it is not Mr Turley’s opinion it is what the constitution says.

      As for your crime with holding the funds, That is what Biden did. He admits it and laughs in front of a camera. Watch the video. The difference is he did it for personal reasons.

      You should obtain a copy of H. R. 3047. Since it would require effort I will help you a little.

      H.R.3047 is the piece of legislation sending the funds to Ukraine.
      It is dated May 30 , 2019. It is 6 pages. Available at the LOC.
      On page 5 is a requirement for the President to provide a report to congress.
      On page 6 the report requirements are laid out. He has 180 days to review all support provided since 2014. He is to among other things assess Russian hybrid warfare. Hybrid warfare is what is done by way of the internet.
      It is only 6 pages you really should take a few minutes to read it and then rethink “the facts”.
      The fact is the bill requires the investigation and assessment for 2014 forward. All the president was asking for was help in gathering the information required by congress.
      Ukrainian press provides some insight:

      https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/interview/618506.html

      The story would make a blockbuster movie. PG gave info to US Embassy. Embassy gave it to FBI. VP comes to Ukraine and has PG fired. PG is slandered mercilessly, he is fired and the case is closed by the new PG his first day on the job. This is what they call the debunked theory. Well documented but debunked?

  5. (music- to tune of Sam Stone..)

    Al Green…Came home!
    To his wife and familleeee.
    After serving in the Congress in D C.
    And Al took to squeeling…
    When he got that empty feeling…
    With a hundred dollar habit..without…
    Overtime!

    And the Dems got in his brain…
    Like a thousand railroad trains…
    Gaining all the politics he lacked…

    etc

  6. The gross face of communist “recreational impeachment.”
    ______________________________________________

    “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach the president, he will get re-elected.”

    – Rep. Al Green

  7. The Democrat Party has risked it all to obstruct an investigation into alleged criminal wrongdoing by Joe Biden, their Presidential candidate. In addition, they are using this opportunity to level unsubstantiated claims against President Trump in an effort to meddle in the 2020 election. This is on top of their activity to change the electoral college, in order to cheat.

    This is looking really bad for Democrats. The Republicans that I talk to are getting angry. I’ve never seen this before. People who never spoke about politics are fed up. My plumber is fed up. The lady at the mail store is furious. So’s the guy who runs the shooting range, the farrier, neighbors, feed store employees, builders, roofers, and any number of business owners. I’ve never seen my mother actually express anger like this. This is especially true of the few Republicans left in CA. We now view CA Democrat voters as perniciously uninformed, and destructive. Some of my Democrat friends have been complaining bitterly about a series of upcoming taxes targeting land owners. What did they think was going to happen when they voted in high tax candidates? Did they think it woudl only happen to “other people” like the rich? Some people don’t care until it happens to them.

    Just because Republicans always took the high road, and didn’t respond in kind, typically, to harassment, bigotry, insults, and assaults upon invited speakers, does not mean they will continue to do so indefinitely.

    1. Even Karen’s horse’s are angry.

      (Karen S sounds a lot like Jonathan in his opening statement the other day.)

      1. Oh, no. My horses are happy and sassy in this cold weather, nickering happily whenever I come out to them.

        Quite different from the hateful unrelenting attacks on conservatives.

        Mock all you want. Democrats ignored how tired Republicans were of being harassed and slandered, and they ended up with Trump in the White House.

        Keep up the bigotry against half the country. Either there will be a Republican in 2020, or perhaps the party will take a page from the Democrat playbook and spend the next 4 years on interminable investigations and impeachment efforts. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Leave a Reply