Thoughts on the House’s Impeachment of President Trump, and on the Senate’s Trial of The Impeachment

1. It was reasonable for the House to impeach President Trump for Ukraine request.

As I told my colleague Jonah Goldberg on his “Remnant” podcast in late October, I have always seen the Ukraine allegations as an impeachment-level event. If the President intentionally leveraged US resources to spur a foreign country to undermine one of the President’s own major political opponents, then the House should impeach the President for abusing his power in a way that directly threatens our Constitution’s democratic processes.

2. The House should have called more witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the President’s actions and better knowledge of his intentions.

As I said above, I think that the factual evidence produced so far was enough to support House impeachment. But the House should have done more: it should have worked harder to secure the testimony of people with firsthand (or better secondhand) knowledge of the President’s intentions: John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, Mick Mulvaney, and Rudy Giuliani.

3. I am very, very wary of the House’s impeachment of President Trump for “obstruction.”

Keith Whittington makes a very good argument in favor of the “obstruction” charge, but in the end I am very, very wary of turning “obstruction” of congressional oversight hearings into an impeachable offense.

4. I don’t know whether the Senate should vote to remove President Trump.

Now that the House has impeached the President, should the Senate remove him? I don’t know.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Adam J. White

Adam J. White

I’m a resident scholar at AEI, and a law professor at George Mason University, directing the law school’s Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State.