An Open Letter on Impeachment
October, 14 2019
I write in strong support of Congress’ impeachment inquiry. I’m a retired attorney with over 45 years of experience in legislation, litigation and policy making at the state, local and federal levels. President Trump’s conduct in seeking to persuade a foreign government to initiate proceedings against one of his chief election rivals is an impeachable offense as envisaged by the framers of the US Constitution. In terms of violating constitutional red lines, I would liken it to driving 100 miles an hour on the wrong side of the road while drunk.
Our founding fathers incorporated the English tradition of and standards for impeachment for the most serious political misconduct of members of the Executive (or Judicial) branch. Since they had just separated from the dictates of the English king and were establishing the world’s first modern democracy, they were particularly concerned about presidential abuses of their constitutional powers. They were also extremely concerned about cabals with foreign governments, particularly those designed to secure and retain elected or appointed office in the executive. The sanctity and integrity of the newly established American electoral process was of paramount concern; voting is restricted to US citizens; foreign nationals cannot vote, nor can they contribute in US elections. The Constitution’s framers gave the impeachment powers to the House and Senate respectively with their roles distinctly designated and corresponding to the historic roles and responsibilities of the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper No. 65 “The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.” https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed65.asp
James Madison made the following argument for the impeachment clause. “Mr. MADISON thought it indispensable that some provision should be made for defending the Community agst. the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate. The limitation of the period of his service was not a sufficient security. He might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers.” https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_720.asp
George Mason, the drafter of and strongest proponent for our nation’s Bill of Rights, argued in favor of the Constitution’s impeachment clause as follows. “Col. MASON. No point is of more importance than that the right of impeachment should be continued. Shall any man be above Justice? Above all shall that man be above it, who can commit the most extensive injustice? … Shall the man who has practised (sic) corruption & by that means procured his appointment in the first instance, be suffered to escape punishment, by repeating his guilt?” https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_720.asp
Our founders strongly preferred that Presidents be removed through the electoral process; they were very concerned that impeachments not become a tool of low partisan intrigue, but rather impeachments were reserved for the most serious violations of the integrity of the nation’s body politic. The House of Representatives is the arm of Congress with the responsibility to investigate the facts and determine by majority vote whether a charge of impeachment is warranted, and the Senate is the jury that decides by a 2/3rds vote whether the President or other high executive branch official should be convicted and removed from office.
In this instance without prejudging the facts that may come out in the House’s inquiry, President Trump appears to be a repeat, unrepentant and absolutely unapologetic offender. His conduct to seek foreign involvement against his one of his chief rivals in a US presidential campaign is impeachable conduct of the first order of magnitude.
As has been already investigated in the run up to the 2016 election as a candidate for the Presidency, his son and son in law met with Russian operatives in Trump Tower to gather political dirt on his opponent, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Candidate Trump encouraged the Russians to find Secretary Clinton’s missing personal e-mails and release them; the Russians immediately tried to do so that evening by hacking her computers without success. The Special Counsel noted these violations of federal campaign laws, but declined to prosecute, noting that knowledge of the law (scienter) would be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. After that two-year investigation, it’s hard to credibly claim with a straight face that the President and his stalwarts are unaware of the restrictions on seeking foreign help in a domestic political campaign.
Yet using the powers of the US government, President Trump and his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, sought to persuade the government of the Ukraine to open up baseless investigations on Joe Biden, his then top ranked potential campaign opponent. He used State Department personnel for these illicit campaign purposes. He withheld and delayed Congressionally approved military assistance desperately needed in the Ukraine’s defense against the Russian incursion. He removed the US ambassador who may have been standing in their way. He held out a visit to the White House as a further inducement to the new Ukrainian president. This was not some random Presidential tweet, but a careful plot hatched out and then executed over many months to sideline a chief rival by involving a foreign government.
Illegal Trump campaign re-election contributions from Ukrainians, possibly facilitated by his attorney Rudy Giuliani and his associates, may be involved. Giuliani’s associates were just arrested, apparently on a one-way ticket, possibly fleeing the country, to Vienna and a meeting with a Russian mafia boss who may have been a source of their campaign cash contributions. And a scheme to put Trump campaign contributors in charge of the Ukrainian natural gas company for their commercial benefit may also have been afoot with the concerted assistance of the Trump Administration.
The President’s legal counselors apparently hid the transcript of Trump’s call with Ukraine’s President in a top-secret classified setting so that others could not find it. They tried to block release of the whistleblower’s complaint to Congress, against the clear requirements of the law. The President and his White House counsel have directed all executive staff not to appear or provide any documents to Congress, which is duly exercising its oversight and impeachment inquiry responsibilities consistent with its constitutional obligations. This too is serious impeachable conduct in violation of the executive’s responsibilities ascribed by the Constitution.
I cannot imagine a stronger, more compelling and more urgent prima facie case for an impeachment inquiry, and, unless it is adequately rebutted, for a Congressional finding of impeachment and referral to your Senate colleagues for trial. Serious damage is already being done to the integrity of the next Presidential election as the President seeks to roadblock and derail one of his leading potential opponents whom he apparently fears the most.
I urge you to fully support the impeachment inquiry, and if the facts bear out, to vote to impeach President Donald J. Trump. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Lucien Wulsin Jr., Esq.