By: Jeffrey Winograd
Part IV – Alexander Hamilton Trumps Adam Schiff
Alexander Hamilton, a key architect and signer of the Constitution, wrote in Federalist No. 65 on the proper court for a trial of impeachments, Stated Hamilton: “A well constituted court for the trial of impeachments, is an object not more to be desired, than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective.”
He continued: “In many cases, [the venue for such a court] will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence and interest on one side, or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger, that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strengths of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.”
What a fitting description of the House of Representatives led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).
Why did the framers of the Constitution place “the delicacy and magnitude of a trust,” as is the court for a trial of impeachment, in the hands of the Senate which, at that time, was comprised of members chosen by state legislatures? In Hamilton’s words: “The difficulty of placing it rightly in a government resting entirely on the basis of periodic elections, will as readily be perceived, when it is considered that the most conspicuous characters in it will, from that circumstance, be too often the leaders, or the tools of the most cunning or the most numerous faction; and on this account, can hardly be expected to possess the requisite neutrality towards those whose conduct may be the subject of scrutiny.”
How could Hamilton possibly have foreseen the emergence of such a devious, lying, leaking legislator as Adam Schiff (D-CA)?
Going back to the words of Schiff in his Nov. 5th op-ed: “The president’s corrupt pressure to secure [Ukraine’s] interference in our election betrayed our national security and his oath of office.”
Finishing in a blaze of self-centered glory, Schiff wrote: “For over a year, I resisted calls for an impeachment inquiry because impeachment was intended to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. But the Founders who devised our government understood that someday, a president might come to power who would fail to defend or would sacrifice the country’s national security in favor of his own personal or political interests, and that Congress would need to consider such a remedy.”
Schiff is guilty of willful ignorance and perhaps he should read the words of Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution: “The President … of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Is President Trump guilty of Treason?
Is President Trump guilty of Bribery?
Has President Trump committed other high Crimes and Misdemeanors?
To this point, it seems that Mr. Schiff has been unable or unwilling to offer any evidence of such illegal conduct by President Trump.
Finally, take a quick look at the House Intelligence Committee’s webpage devoted to impeachment. Forget that it looks and reads like a political flyer.
Instead, focus on what is alleged to be President Trump’s “grave abuse of the power of the presidency.”
Specifically, it reads: “The House of Representatives launched an impeachment inquiry to ascertain the full extent of the president’s misconduct, and thanks to testimony from dedicated, nonpartisan public servants, we now have a much fuller picture of how President Trump abused the State Department and other levers of government for his own political gain.”
IN OTHER WORDS, SCHIFF IS SAYING IMPEACH AND CONVICT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR ABUSING THE DEEP STATE.