Congressman Sherman Introduces Article of Impeachment: Obstruction of Justice

darksithpro

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Oct 27, 2016
582
4,492
Wow!

https://sherman.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-sherman-introduces-article-of-impeachment-obstruction-of


Statement of Congressman Brad Sherman

I am pleased that Congressman Al Green (D-TX) has joined me in filing Articles of Impeachment against Donald J. Trump. We now begin the effort to force the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on Obstruction of Justice and Russian interference in our election.

Recent disclosures by Donald Trump Jr. indicate that Trump’s campaign was eager to receive assistance from Russia. It now seems likely that the President had something to hide when he tried to curtail the investigation of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and the wider Russian probe. I believe his conversations with, and subsequent firing of, FBI Director James Comey constitute Obstruction of Justice.

Every day Democrats, Republicans, and the entire world are shocked by the latest example of America’s amateur President. Ignorance accompanied by a refusal to learn. Lack of impulse control, accompanied by a refusal to have his staff control his impulses. We’re no longer surprised by any action, no matter how far below the dignity of the office—and no matter how dangerous to the country.

But the Constitution does not provide for the removal of a President for impulsive, ignorant incompetence. It does provide for the removal of a President for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

As the investigations move forward, additional evidence supporting additional Articles of Impeachment may emerge. However, as to Obstruction of Justice, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b)(3), the evidence we have is sufficient to move forward now. And the national interest requires that we do so.

Introducing Articles of Impeachment will have two possible outcomes. First, I have slight hope it will inspire an ‘intervention’ in the White House. If Impeachment is real, if they actually see Articles, perhaps we will see incompetency replaced by care. Perhaps uncontrollable impulses will be controlled. And perhaps the danger our nation faces will be ameliorated.

Second, and more likely, filing Articles of Impeachment is the first step on a very long road. But if the impulsive incompetency continues, then eventually—many, many months from now—Republicans will join the impeachment effort.

I author Articles of Impeachment not to change our national policy. I served with Mike Pence in Congress for twelve years and I disagree with him on just about everything. I never dreamed I would author a measure that would put him in the White House. I am introducing Articles of Impeachment to begin a long process to protect our country from abuse of power, obstruction of justice, and impulsive, ignorant incompetence.
 
Last edited:


SusanK

macrumors 68000
Oct 9, 2012
1,673
2,636
This needs to be introduced by Repubs if it's going to stick.
Never happen. The GOP will protect Trump no matter what he or his weird family does. The same party that hated on President Obama for eight years. If President Obama would have changed water into wine GOP would have accused him of alcoholism. GOP hypocrisy has no bounds.

GOP will soon be saying "But Hillary . . ."

Sickening.
 

TheAppleFairy

macrumors 68030
Mar 28, 2013
2,505
1,939
The Clinton Archipelago unfortunately
Never happen. The GOP will protect Trump no matter what he or his weird family does. The same party that hated on President Obama for eight years. If President Obama would have changed water into wine GOP would have accused him of alcoholism. GOP hypocrisy has no bounds.

GOP will soon be saying "But Hillary . . ."

Sickening.
Obama sure couldn't turn water into wine, but he did help turn some major cities into war zones, and turned the middle east over to ISIS.
 

jpietrzak8

macrumors 65816
Feb 16, 2010
1,053
6,082
Dayton, Ohio
The concept of impeachment has been getting thrown around way too much lately. Starting with the impeachment of Bill Clinton, it's been used not to remove someone who is failing to properly serve the country, but rather to simply register one's displeasure with the man in office.

For all his philandering and his squirming responses to questioning, the impeachment of Clinton went nowhere, and for good reason: his actions were in fact not a detriment to his performance in office. For all the ugliness of the current Russia scandal, there has been as yet zero evidence that it has had any effect on the country either.

Until something happens that actually has an appreciable effect on citizens' lives, making a martyr of the man only makes him more popular, not less. As shown so well by Bill Clinton.
 

A.Goldberg

macrumors 68020
Jan 31, 2015
2,327
7,657
Boston
I doubt this will be anything but symbolic. Personally I think the democrats are just pursuing this to distract Trump from his real agenda.

The Trump-Russia evidence I'm aware of is flimsy. Most of it is mutual connections between Trump/Trump officials and Russians who have connections to Putin. I'd imagine many politicians have similar connections. That's hardly evidence in my book. The current Trump Jr.-Russian Lawyer scandal I doubt will amount to anything. The law regarding "receiving a contribution or donation from a foreign national" is a bit of a stretch considering it's a campaign finance law.

If receiving incriminating information is a "contribution" or "donation" then wouldn't an endorsement from a foreign prime minister or high taking official be considered the same. Or the condemnation of a political candidate by an foreign national be a contribution to the candidates opposition? The Clinton Foundation took large sums international donations that were used to support causes later touted in Clinton's campaign. Buying political brownie points so to speak.

I'm not saying Trump is innocent or guilty, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised. I also wouldn't be surprised if this is simply the normal behind the scenes of presidential elections. I haven't seen concrete evidence enough evidence for something like impeachment.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,528
OBJECTIVE reality
So this is the new politics, eh? This country is surely doomed.
Huh. That's pretty much the way we felt when they did it to Bill Clinton.

Nevertheless, I think this is premature. Neither Congressional committee has announced their findings yet, and Bob Mueller is still just getting started. And our intelligence agencies have not told us everything they know.

I can understand the temptation, though. Trump and Trump Jr. have admitted to some pretty shady stuff. If I'm in Congress, though, I want to have all the evidence I can before I go ahead with this. Let's let this play out.

Oh, and let's do to Trump what they did to Bill Clinton: haul him before the investigation and give him a chance to perjure himself. If he does -- and the man's such a habitual liar there's a solid chance he will -- it'll be over something much more serious than a blowjob.
 

Admiral

macrumors regular
Mar 14, 2015
216
636
I honestly don't understand why anyone still supports Trump. His treasonous activities are the types of actions that make true patriotic conservative Americans like myself see red. :mad: To support Trump after these latest emails is blatantly anti-American.
It's possible that some of us don't exactly support Trump, per se, but rather that we know what "treason" actually means.
 

oneMadRssn

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2011
4,742
11,032
New England
I doubt this will be anything but symbolic. Personally I think the democrats are just pursuing this to distract Trump from his real agenda.

The Trump-Russia evidence I'm aware of is flimsy. Most of it is mutual connections between Trump/Trump officials and Russians who have connections to Putin. I'd imagine many politicians have similar connections. That's hardly evidence in my book. The current Trump Jr.-Russian Lawyer scandal I doubt will amount to anything. The law regarding "receiving a contribution or donation from a foreign national" is a bit of a stretch considering it's a campaign finance law.

If receiving incriminating information is a "contribution" or "donation" then wouldn't an endorsement from a foreign prime minister or high taking official be considered the same. Or the condemnation of a political candidate by an foreign national be a contribution to the candidates opposition? The Clinton Foundation took large sums international donations that were used to support causes later touted in Clinton's campaign. Buying political brownie points so to speak.

I'm not saying Trump is innocent or guilty, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised. I also wouldn't be surprised if this is simply the normal behind the scenes of presidential elections. I haven't seen concrete evidence enough evidence for something like impeachment.
How about Kushner and Sessions lying on their SF86 form? Pretty much proven irrefutably now, thanks to Junior. Five years imprisonment is the statutory punishment.

Why isn't anyone charging them though? Why are the ones close to Trump being protected?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MadeTheSwitch

jerwin

macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2015
2,460
4,452
The law regarding "receiving a contribution or donation from a foreign national" is a bit of a stretch considering it's a campaign finance law.
See! This is why lawyers exist.

The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.
https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml
 

Admiral

macrumors regular
Mar 14, 2015
216
636
How about Kushner and Sessions lying on their SF86 form? Pretty much proven irrefutably now, thanks to Junior. Five years imprisonment is the statutory punishment.
Surely you are aware that the form being filled out with incorrect information ≠ lying, and that the statutory punishment is up to five years' imprisonment. Why the hyperbole?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tgara

A.Goldberg

macrumors 68020
Jan 31, 2015
2,327
7,657
Boston
How about Kushner and Sessions lying on their SF86 form? Pretty much proven irrefutably now, thanks to Junior. Five years imprisonment is the statutory punishment.

Why isn't anyone charging them though? Why are the ones close to Trump being protected?
The "I forgot" response seems to be a valid excuse for the rich and powerful. To some extent I can accept a level forgetfulness, if you asked me to recall every patient I've had over the past couple years I surely would forget a few. But you would assume they, like I, would have records.

But even with proven indescretions of top Tump officials I suppose one must prove Trump was aware of such illicit behavior and that his involvement is grounds for impeachment.

I'm sure that if there is a crime of substance to be found, it will be uncovered in regards to Trump. But until then this is a horse and pony show.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rhonindk