Dem Controlled House Impeaches Trump


On Wednesday, House members impeached Trump on two counts as expected, politicized voting almost entirely along party lines — 230 – 197 for alleged abuse of power, 229 – 198 for alleged obstruction of Congress.

No Republicans supported the scam, choreographed for political reasons, seeking to delegitimize and weaken Trump ahead of November 2020 elections, a scheme more likely to fail than succeed.

Four Dems broke ranks. Tulsi Gabbard voted “present” on both articles of impeachment, calling proceedings a “partisan endeavor,” adding:

“I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing.”

“I could also not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our countries.”

Three other Dem House members did not vote. They represent districts Trump carried in 2016.

Notably, 20 GOP House members not running for re-election next year voted against the sham impeachment. Some broke with Trump and party leaders on other issues.

Two articles of impeachment introduced last week were approved by majority vote along party lines:

Article I: Abuse of power, falsely claiming Trump sought foreign interference from Ukraine in the US 2020 presidential election.

Ukrainian President Zelensky debunked the accusation, publicly saying there was no Trump blackmail threat, no quid pro quo, no conspiracy, nothing discussed about withholding US aid for political reasons.

Article II: Obstruction of Congress, falsely claimed he “directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives pursuant to its sole Power of Impeachment,” adding:

“(W)ithout lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed Executive Branch agencies, offices, and officials not to comply with those subpoenas. President Trump thus interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House…”

Trump’s unwillingness to participate in the sham process did not rise to the level of obstructing Congress.

Nor did urging current and former regime members not to cooperate with Dems because proceedings lacked legitimacy.

Some did anyway, showing no official presidential order barred their participation.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the impeachment process was unfair, saying:

Dems “refused GOP witness requests in the Intelligence Committee, denied the GOP a hearing day in the Judiciary Committee, and rushed the impeachment debate and vote.”

“They claim impeachment is a serious, solemn moment but then sprinted to judgment to meet the political needs of swing-district members who want(ed) (proceedings) over fast.”

Impeachment charges excluded mention of specific criminal behavior.

Ahead of the Wednesday vote, Law Professor Jonathan Turley said: “You could impeach every living president” by the standards Dems used to impeach Trump.

Asked how this will affect future presidents, he said it’s “going to have a significant impact (because) this sets the standard quite low for impeachment.”

A new Gallop poll released Wednesday, conducted from Dec. 2 – 15, showed Trump’s approval rating at 45%, up from 39% when the impeachment inquiry began — one point below his highest 46% number since taking office.

The poll also found that 51% of respondents oppose impeachment, 46% supporting it.

Only 5% of Republican respondents support impeachment compared to 85% of Dems.

The latest Quinnipiac University, PBS/NPR/Marist, and USA Today/Suffolk University polls also show a slim anti-impeachment majority.

Polls by Fox News and CNN show independents evenly divided on the issue.

Dems pinned false hopes on Robert Mueller’s Russiagate witch-hunt probe. Its failure led to Act II — Ukrainegate, proving no more successful.

Everything thrown at Trump for political reasons so far backfired. Even hugely one-sided anti-Trump media reports failed to  weaken and make him vulnerable to removal from office by impeachment.

No legal justification exists to impeach Trump — no “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” in two articles of impeachment as required under the Constitution’s Article II, Section 4.

No evidence proves he colluded improperly or illegally with Ukraine, as Dems falsely claim — wanting him removed from office for illegitimate reasons.

Articles of impeachment against him ignored his high crimes of war and against humanity, along with grievously breaching the public trust — because the vast majority of congressional members share guilt.

On Wednesday, Politico reported that Pelosi “threatens to delay a Senate impeachment trial,” adding:

“Some legal scholars have suggested she could consider refusing to transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate” because the GOP-controlled body will reject weak charges against Trump.

Pelosi so far said nothing about sending articles of impeachment to the Senate. According to senior Dems, she’ll likely delay transmittal at least until early January.

Dems must next adopt a second resolution, naming impeachment managers to send the process to the Senate.

The body’s Majority Leader Mitch McConnell sides with Trump, saying he won’t “leap into the breach and search desperately for ways to get to ‘guilty,’ ” separately saying: “I’m not an impartial juror. This is a political process.”

“The House made a partisan political decision to impeach. I would anticipate we will have a largely partisan outcome in the Senate.”

According to two GOP senators, whip John Cornyn and another speaking anonymously, McConnell will move to acquit Trump instead of mobilizing Republicans to dismiss articles of impeachment alone.

A super-majority of 67 votes is needed to convict. No GOP House support for impeachment indicates at least overwhelming Senate opposition by Republican members.

In November 2020, voters will have final say. Both parties, Trump, and his Dem opponent, will try using the impeachment issue to their advantage.

Based on where things stand now, neither side has an advantage.

A slight majority against impeachment and Trump’s higher approval rating than when the inquiry began may aid his chance for reelection if he retains this edge.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Featured image is from Palácio do Planalto, Flick

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." Visit his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]