Reid K. Beveridge’s epistle on impeachment was a remarkable example, in my opinion, of how many right-wing followers of Donald Trump have essentially decided to adopt a system of “alternative facts” and outright misstatements instead of objective reality (“Impeachment can be fraught with politics,” Jan. 24). The term “gaslighting” no longer refers just to a 1944 movie but also to many statements made by the Republican Party and their right-wing media mouthpieces.
It is simply not true that many progressives or liberals have “never accepted the fact” that Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. Hillary Clinton never said the election was “stolen.” She believes, and Robert Mueller’s investigation confirmed, that the Russian government engaged in a campaign of disinformation and leaks of stolen emails to assist Trump’s campaign, which probably was a key factor in his eking out enough electoral votes to win. She did win almost 3 million more popular votes than Trump, but she and all other liberals are painfully aware of the fact that in our crazy and antiquated system of choosing presidents, a candidate can get more votes from the people and still lose.
She graciously conceded to Trump the morning after the election, and then-President Barack Obama immediately invited Trump to visit the White House, which he soon did. In January 2017, then-Vice President Joe Biden presided over the counting of the electoral votes, which certified the election for Trump, even though he was disappointed with the result.
The Constitution says that presidents can be impeached for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The standard definition of bribery is “the offering, promising, giving, accepting or soliciting of an advantage as an inducement for an action, which is illegal, unethical or a breach of trust” or “offering something desirable or something of value in exchange for getting something in return.”
Yet Mr. Beveridge maintains that President Trump’s phone call to the president of Ukraine – in which he clearly threatened to withhold vital aid from the United States unless that country’s government would cooperate with Trump’s desire for an investigation into his prospective opponent in the coming election – is not bribery. He says the president of the United States can “call a foreign counterpart and say anything he wishes.” So much for the president not being above the laws.
The writers of the Constitution, who were especially concerned with foreign influence on our political system, would, I believe, have seen this as a perfect example of what they were thinking about when they wrote that article. Mr. Trump should have been removed from office a year ago.
The most mind-numbing example of gaslighting in Mr. Beveridge’s letter is when he complains about the president being “impeached for making a speech to his supporters, urging them to march on the Capitol and lobby their representatives.”
President Trump — and his campaign — helped organize the rally for Jan. 6, the day the electoral votes were to be certified at the Capital; the president tweeted that it “will be wild” at the rally; he urged the visibly agitated crowd to “be strong” and “fight”; and his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, talked about “trial by combat.” Yet Mr. Beveridge would have us believe that they expected another 1963 March on Washington. Give me a break!
Mr. Beveridge also asserts that “no constitutional scholar I have heard in the last week or two thinks Trump’s speech is anything close to inciting the riot that ensued.” I don’t know which ones he has consulted, but the constitutional scholars that I have heard or read are virtually unanimous in the view that the president was clearly culpable of inciting what, in reality, was a lynch mob sent to attack a sitting Congress of the United States in the performance of a constitutional duty that Mr. Trump wanted to stop from taking place. As Trump’s friend, Chris Christie, said, “If inciting to insurrection isn’t impeachable, then I don’t really know what is.”
We have a republic — not a monarchy or a totalitarian dictatorship. Mr. Beveridge’s view of presidential power and congressional impeachment would give us a different form of government than the framers of the Constitution created. I wonder if he believes that a president that he likes and supports could ever do anything to deserve impeachment and removal from office or disqualification from holding office in the future.
Daniel Pritchett
Dover
