(Listen to the Radio Version, here!) (Special thanks to Eureka Broadcasting!)
This is AM for your CC
If anything could define our current culture of entertainment and emotion over substance and news--it would be all this talk of Impeachment.
It's been said that if you cant explain something in simple terms, then you probably don't understand it.(1)
Ask anyone why President Trump should be impeached, and all you will get are silly Fake News talking points. Typically its guilt by association or something like the "seriousness of the charge..."
Impeachment is a subtle tool that the Founders of this country left for government to be run well. As you will see, the current batch of congressional democrats is mis-using it.
The roots of the impeachment clause are actually a reflection of the Aristocracy that was meant to represent Americans in the early congress. The term "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" is often said by people that don't really know it what means. High Crimes means exactly that. A high crime would be treason or something that dramatically puts the offender at odds with the health and well being of the country.
It's the other word, "misdemeanors," that causes so much confusion. The Founding Fathers didn't mean Misdemeanors like we do today.(0) IT doesn't mean you get impeached over a Fender bender or jaywalking, no--misdemeanor means that your behavior needs to be one of an honor and integrity that allows you to function as a statesman. Misdemeanor doesn't mean that you are perfect or a puritan. But it does mean that you maintain a character that allows you to represent your constituents and be an above board human being.
The misdemeanor clause fell out of use when the American aristocracy retired from public service after several generations. The robust free market that the aristocracy helped unleash actually undid the social framework that kept the aristocrats in charge. Men of sheer ability like Cornelious Vanderbilt destroyed the privileged family birthright that one particular family had on shipping rights to New York Commerce(2). If you need more examples of the new Americanism repealing aristocracy, you can learn about Andrew Jacksons campaign to the white house. (3)
I don't want to get off topic, my point is that the impeachment definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" is archaic, meant for a type of America that doesn't exist, one where you can only be removed for treason and dishonoring your role as a statesman
Forget about Impeaching Donald Trump, he is the most transparent president in history, and when you have a man who isn't afraid to tell European nations to pay their bills, who refuses to take a salary, and whose net worth has plummeted where most presidents get wealthy during their time--you have a man who's statesmanship is above reproach.
There are hundreds of congressional members over our 229 years of age as a nation, that should have been impeached under the misdemeanors clause. Certainly several of the Democrats running for president should be impeached. Let's take a look at just a few:
Bernie Sanders mumbled that terrorists, such as the Boston bomber, ought to have the right to vote. That's impeachable under the Misdemeanors clause
Elizabeth Warren engaged in cultural appropriation as she recklessly claimed to be of native American heritage while she had no proof, and when confronted she doubled down on the disgrace. That's impeachable in a house of honor.
Joe Biden is recorded, telling an audience about a quid pro quo where he threatened to withhold funding to a foreign government if they refused to fire a prosecutor that was targeting his son. That Is impeachment material under the clause.
Impeachment, like most of our system of government is corrupted by people that only care about their own power.
I have trouble watching the news anymore. I hope that we stop putting up with the entertainment side of the news and start actually demanding our politicians work for us. Wouldn't that be nice.
0) High Crimes and Misdemeanors by Ann Coulter - It's funny that I first learned the true definition of impeachment from her book, while she seems to disregard her 1990s research in favor of taking an Anti-Trump position which i believe is in severe contradiction to her fantastic book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors. Perhaps she is now more opportunist than scholarly?
1) Richard Feynman
2) The First Tycoon: The Epic Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt by T.J. Stiles