[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 172 (Wednesday, October 30, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6261-S6262]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IMPEACHMENT
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I know you aren't going to believe
this--what happened in addition to President Trump being sworn in--but
on January 20, 2017, President Trump was sworn into office and became
our Nation's 45th President. Most Presidents enjoy what political
scientists refer to as a ``honeymoon'' period. During that honeymoon
period, these new Presidents are given a chance to push their agenda,
and partisan politics usually takes a back seat--but not for this
President.
On his Inauguration Day, January 20, 2017, a Washington Post headline
read--so it had to be coming out even before he was sworn in--``The
campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.'' That campaign has been
in full swing ever since. Let's make no mistake: This process about
concerns over alleged high crimes and misdemeanors, as the Constitution
speaks about the reasons for impeachment, doesn't really mean much
compared to an effort to impeach this President that started before he
ever was sworn in. No, instead, this is about the Democratic Party,
still bitter years later, trying to undo the 2016 election.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record
that article in the Washington Post, dated January 20, 2017.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Washington Post, Jan. 20, 2017]
The Campaign to Impeach President Trump Has Begun
(By Matea Gold)
The effort to impeach President Donald John Trump is
already underway.
At the moment the new commander in chief was sworn in, a
campaign to build public support for his impeachment went
live at ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org, spearheaded by two liberal
advocacy groups aiming to lay the groundwork for his eventual
ejection from the White House.
The organizers behind the campaign, Free Speech for People
and RootsAction, are hinging their case on Trump's insistence
on maintaining ownership of his luxury hotel and golf course
business while in office. Ethics experts have warned that his
financial holdings could potentially lead to constitutional
violations and undermine public faith in his decision-making.
Their effort is early, strategists admit. But they insist
it is not premature--even if it triggers an angry backlash
from those who will argue that they are not giving the new
president a chance.
``If we were to wait for all the ill effects that could
come from this, too much damage to our democracy would
occur,'' said Ron Fein, legal director at Free Speech for
People. ``It will undermine faith in basic institutions. If
nothing else, it's important for Americans to trust that the
president is doing what he thinks is the right thing . . .
not that it would help jump-start a stalled casino project in
another country.''
The impeachment drive comes as Democrats and liberal
activists are mounting broad opposition to stymie Trump's
agenda. Among the groups organizing challenges to the Trump
administration is the American
[[Page S6262]]
Civil Liberties Union, which plans to wield public-records
requests and lawsuits as part of an aggressive action plan
aimed at protecting immigrants and pushing for government
transparency, among other issues.
``We think that President Trump will be in violation of
the Constitution and federal statutes on day one, and we plan
a vigorous offense to ensure the worst of the constitutional
violations do not occur,'' said Anthony D. Romero, the ACLU's
executive director.
``We may have a new president, but we have the same old
system of checks and balances,'' he added.
Strategists behind the campaign for impeachment said they
are confident that other groups will soon join their cause.
They argue that Trump will immediately be in violation of the
U.S. Constitution's Foreign Emoluments Clause, which
prohibits a president from accepting a gift or benefit from a
foreign leader or government.
Fein cited several examples, including rent paid by the
Industrial & Commercial Bank of China for its space in Trump
Tower in New York and potential ongoing spending by foreign
diplomats at the Trump International Hotel in Washington and
other Trump properties. In addition, he said, royalties
collected by the Trump organization from the president's
business partner in the Philippines, who was recently named
special envoy to the United States, could violate the clause.
Trump said this month that he would donate ``profits''
from foreign business clients to the U.S. Treasury. However,
neither Trump nor representatives of the Trump Organization
have provided details on how such payments would be tracked,
collected and disbursed.
The foreign emoluments clause has never been tested in the
courts, and some scholars argue that violating it would not
qualify as ``treason, bribery or other high crimes and
misdemeanors,'' the grounds for impeachment of a federal
official.
But Fein noted that former Virginia governor Edmund
Jennings Randolph, a delegate to the Constitutional
Convention and later the first U.S. attorney general, argued
during Virginia's debate over ratifying the constitution that
a president who was found to have taken a foreign emolument
``may be impeached.''
His group has mapped out a long-shot political strategy to
build support for a vote in the House on articles of
impeachment.
The first step is fairly simple: getting a resolution
introduced that calls for the House Judiciary Committee to
investigate whether there are grounds to impeach Trump--a
move that Fein said a number of members of Congress are
interested in taking. ``Getting it introduced is not going to
be a problem,'' he said.
Still, the idea that a majority of the GOP-controlled
House members would ultimately vote to launch an
investigation of the new president seems highly improbable.
Fein said he is confident the political climate will change
and lawmakers will eventually support the effort.
``I think that at a certain point, the combination of new
revelations coming out and, importantly, calls and pressure
from constituents in their own districts will be a deciding
factor,'' he said. ``And at some point, they will decide it
is in their own interests to support this.''
While half a dozen federal judges in American history have
been impeached by the House and successfully convicted in the
Senate, no U.S. president has ever been removed from office
through such a process. The closest was Andrew Johnson, who
narrowly avoided conviction in the Senate in 1868 after the
House charged him with removing the secretary of war in
violation of the Tenure of Office Act.
In 1974, the House Judiciary Committee approved articles
of impeachment against then-President Richard Nixon, but he
resigned before they could be voted on by the full House.
President Bill Clinton was impeached by the House on charges
of perjury and obstruction of justice, but the articles of
impeachment were defeated in the Senate in 1999.
Mr. GRASSLEY. I yield the floor.
____________________