Tag Archives: quid pro quo

David Davenport: Impeachment Is an Extraordinary Remedy

In the first 175 years of the nation, the House of Representatives impeached only one president, Andrew Johnson. Now in the last 57 years, it’s impeached two, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and it may be ready to impeach a third.

Why the rise in impeachments? Because we forget that impeachment is extraordinary. The normal way to remove a president is by the people through elections. The extraordinary way is impeachment, with its Constitutional requirement of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Lacking political patience, we threaten to make the extraordinary now ordinary.

Politics is an ugly business. Quid pro quos in foreign policy? They doubtless happen more than we think and, if we don’t like them, we have a chance to cast our vote in one year. But a case of high crimes and misdemeanors demanding an extraordinary remedy?

I think not.

Read More »

Hugh Hewitt: Stick With the Facts

As the Democrats in the House continue their hyper-partisan efforts to impeach the president, those of us in media who have defended the president need to stay far away from exaggeration during this process.

Some of the “deep-state” hyperbole we see distracts from the need to drive home the most important point — Chairman Adam Schiff is denying the president and his colleagues in the minority due process.

Senate Republicans should refuse any article of impeachment birthed by this deeply broken “process.” But neither the president nor the country is helped by hyperbole on their side.

Our rhetorical efforts should be focused on the fact that Trump did not commit an impeachable offense. In fact, he committed no offense at all — no quid pro quo, no extortion, no bribery.

Opportunities are lost every day when the president’s defenders overreach into conspiracy theory and refuse to wait upon the facts about wrongdoings by government officials in 2016, indeed if there are any at all.

Read More »

Hugh Hewitt: Release the Transcript

When Democrats demanded President Trump release the transcript of his phone call with Ukraine’s President Zelensky, the president quickly did so, even though such a precedent is deeply disturbing when one considers the need for any president to be able to assure their counterparts of confidentiality.

Now the tables have turned: Democrats staged a showy hearing in the House Intelligence Committee last week, featuring former Special Envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker. Selected tiny bits of the proceedings were leaked in an attempt to bolster the Democrats’ threadbare argument that a quid pro quo happened. Republicans in the hearing say the full testimony reveals exactly the opposite, that there was no quid pro quo.

But: Adam Schiff—the chair—won’t release the transcript of the hearing after he demanded Trump release the transcript of the call.

Which one has something to hide?

The gravity of impeachment and the polarized nature of today’s political environment demands transparency.

Release the transcript, Adam Schiff.

Read More »