I am compelled this morning to share a few thoughts on the reality of what is taking place with the impeachment inquiry. I find it very disconcerting that many Republicans of the House of Representatives find it their job to promote and act on behalf of the Executive Branch. You might ask why I find this disconcerting. Let me explain further on this singular point.
Our government functions with three (3) named and, four (4) branches that are responsible to hold each other in ‘check and balance’. Those branches are:
- Congress: The Congress of the United States consists of the; House of Representatives and the Senate.
- Congress is impowered by Article 1, Section 1, “All Legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…”
- Article 1, Section 3, Clause 5, “..and have the sole Power of Impeachment.”
- Article 1, Section 3, Clause 7, “The Senate shall have sole Power to try all Impeachments…”
- Article 1, Section 5, Clause 2 states: “Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings…”
- Executive Branch: The Executive Branch is responsible for the enforcement of the Laws of the United States. The President of the United States, who’s responsibility is to ‘..affirm…preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” (Article II, Section 1, Clause 8)
- Article II, Section 4, “The President, vice-President and all civil Officers of the United States, Shall be removed from office for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
- Judicial Branch: The Judicial Branch has a very limited role in cases of Impeachment.
- Article 1, Section 3, Clause 6; “..When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside…”
- The Fourth Branch of government not directly numeralized but fully implied throughout the document is clear that the citizenry and the Free Press are responsible to hold all Government Actors accountable to ‘oath and affirmation’. Written and signed law to protect a person(s) identity in which great harm or irreparable damage to a person witnessing a crime and testifying on the actions of, criminality of, or harm to the public, was created for just such purposes based upon the premise that ‘equal protection of witnesses must be offered to control corrupt and powerful individuals, organizations and government itself.
- We come now to ‘witness protection’. The 108th CONGRESS, 2d Session, H. R. 5107, IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, September 21, 2004 voted affirmatively in favor of this bill. The vote so all are aware was 393 yea, 14 nay in the House
In the Senate the vote was
Specifically, this bill states as follows:
Sec. 3771. Crime victims’ rights 3771. Crime victims’ rights
- Rights of crime victims
- A crime victim has the following rights:
- The right to “be reasonably protected from the accused.”
*“H.R. 5107 — 108th Congress: Justice for All Act of 2004.” http://www.GovTrack.us. 2004. November 19, 2019 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/108/hr5107
- The Bill HB 5107 was signed into law on October 30, 2004 by then President Bush (43).
Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (S-20), 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)-(9), Pub.L. 101-12
Which passed in Congress (Senate 54/43) This was signed into Law by President Bush (41)
This bill has been revised and updated repeatedly. Most recently is was reauthorized
So why all the blather here:
This is not a reality TV show my friends. This is serious, this is national security, this is what is called, ‘holding every American accountable to the same legal standards, No one is above the Law’
Firstly, I would like to point out that the whistleblower is protected by the law above. A national law that was passed by a near majority of congress.
Secondly, this case is not about the a ‘whistleblower’, it is about Patriotic American’s performing their duty as prescribed by ‘law’ and by personal rules of their departments and offices, i.e. NSC, Dept of State et.al.
Thirdly, this inquiry is not about Vice President Biden nor his civilian son.(in a court of law, this line of discussion would have been stricken) as ‘not what the case is about”.
Fourth, this case is strictly about the President of the United States using coercion, bribery and/or undue influence in an effort to extract a specific ‘investigation’ into a citizen that happens to be the leading candidate in the upcoming election for the Office of the President of the United States.
Fifth, there is NO Difference between Quid-Pro-Quo and Bribery. In fact, they are the same. “You do something for me, I’ll do something for you”. In this exact case that Quid-Pro-Quo is: if you investigate, we will release your funds. The ‘funds’ become and are the Bribe. This is straight forward, ‘Do me a favor…’
Sixth, The President attacks stating he/Giuliani was working to quell “corruption”. The previous corruption was removed under the previous administrations work, new presidential elections and the so-called Corrupt Prosecutor and former President were removed. So why would the Ambassador of Ukraine need to be removed when they were already handling the corruption.
So, moving forward. So, all are clear, Congress has the full right to Make ALL Laws deemed necessary. Not the President! The President is NOT the Boss, The President is Not in Charge of making laws, The Executive Branch is in charge of enforcing the laws of the United States as referenced in #2 above. The Office of the President is one-third of the Government, it is fair to characterize the President is the nation’s fascilator. He guides the nation via the laws as written.
Congress: The Speaker of the House is third (3rd) in line of progression to replace the President or the Vice President if they are removed, incapacitated, unable to perform duties or die. There is questionable concern whether this process is subject to review based up the National Security Act of 1947 and subsequent amendments.
As noted above, the House and Senate chose their rules of conduct. I am including the link here ( https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/HMAN-115/pdf/HMAN-115.pdf )so you may do as I have, read the rules, understand the rules, and know that if you do not like the rules (as a congress-person) you have the right to ‘re-write portions, sections, departmentalize as you choose and submit to the full house amendments to change.
These rules as provided, are the same rules that are being used for this Presidential Impeachment Inquiry. Let it be known that these are the same rules that were put in place for the Benghazi Hearings, these rules are the ‘Rules of Congress’. To say they are ‘unfair’, to say ‘we have no voice’, to say ‘we have no right’ is patently false. These are the rules that were selected, supported and voted upon under Speaker of the House- Paul Ryan and the Republican Majority.
Congress Does not have the Power to Impeach. Congress has the duty of Inquiry to determine if facts are sufficient to proceed to Impeachment through trail in the Senate. Think of what is taking place as that which occurs at the local level of judicial proceedings, (that of a Grand Jury).
I find it totally wrong of those in Congress, whether Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or whatever, for elected representatives to defend or attempt to prosecute a sitting President. The duty of a congressperson is to investigate the facts to determine if illegality or violation of law occurred. To attack, demean or insinuate that a witness’s credibility is somehow skewed because of political leanings simply is demeaning, rude and not of the intended purposes.
The purpose of the inquiry is to investigate allegations of wrongdoing on the part of another branch of government. Party Politics has no place in this action. What we have observed in this hearing as well as three previous hearings is political partisanship and the total lack of “Representation” of the civil government and the citizens of the nation. What we have observed firsthand is elected Congress-men/women acting in concert to obstruct the intent of the hearings and to demonstrate partisanship in NOT upholding their constitutional oath of office to uphold the Constitution.
The continued attempts to ‘OUT’ the whistleblower are again another direct attempt to NOT uphold constitution or the laws of this United States. The support and legal place of these laws are stated above, see all item #5 and then refer to item #4.
So once again, please understand that the Impeachment Inquiry taking place is purely to verify the allegations of officials within our United States Government that have observed inconsistency’s within approved US guidelines and rules of engagement. By codified law, the Congress is required to do so.
Once Congress completes the Inquiry, it is then the responsibility of the Committee overseeing the Inquiry to say: ‘yes, the allegations as submitted by government officials through the proper processes “have been /or have Not” met the burden of substantiation and, ‘we the Committee on XXX recommend the following charges;
Count 1 of Indictment, and then listing of any subsequent Counts to follow…
be brought forward to the full House of Representatives for a vote to proceed to Impeachment of XXX.
If approved by the House, then it moves to Trial in the Senate where the Chief Justice presides. (see item #3)
At this point, this is where you the citizen participates and notify your Senators and Representatives of your thoughts and opinions.
Lastly the Senate will vote (see item #1c)
This is how the process works in a brief summary using the current matters before the Senate.
I have tried to be brief; I have merely provided the facts of how our system works without a litany of boring details that would most likely not be reviewed anyway.
I hope this helps you to better understand what is taking place and how our Constitutional Government works.