The trials and tribulations of impeachment

Like many Americans and global citizens, I was glued to the television for the impeachment trial of Donald Trump with its painful, horrific reminders of Jan. 6. I watched profiles in courage — including the seven Republican members of Congress who broke with their party to vote their conscience, and profiles in weakness exemplified by the former president’s defense team offering nothing to justify their case.

And I watched the confusing statements of the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) trying to have it both ways — arguing that Trump had provoked and incited the insurrection but that he could be acquitted because he was no longer in office. 

The trial was exhausting and infuriating. 

Actually, there were four Trump impeachment trials this week.

1. The constitutional question

The first trial was a legal one, beginning with fundamental legal arguments over the constitutionality of impeaching a president who no longer holds office.

Legal scholars danced on the heads of pins. Ultimately, both sides invoked the text of the Constitution, which grants the Senate the “sole power” to try “all” impeachments. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Article I, Section 3 says there’s an additional punishment the Senate could impose: “Disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” 

Historians were also consulted on the legalities of impeachment. Citing the 1876 impeachment trial of former War Secretary William Belknap, Democrats said the Senate already has established precedent to hold officials accountable even after they became private citizens. In the end, the Senate voted largely along party lines to uphold the constitutionality of Trump’s impeachment trial, allowing the proceedings to move forward. (The verdict in that trial was 56-44 in favor of proceeding with the trail, with six Republicans joining every Democrat to go forward with the trial.) 

2. “Incitement”?

Then came the second legal trial over whether or not Trump’s behavior constituted “incitement” and caused the “insurrection” at the Capitol on Jan. 6. The law is pretty clear on what that means. It “includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.”

Brought into evidence were horrifying, searing audio and video from Jan. 6 interspersed with statements by Trump at his rally earlier that morning. The presentation by the House impeachment managers was compelling and dramatic. They connected the dots between an angry man and an angry mob as the linear nature of the day unfolded with resistance by the president and his supporters on the day the election was certified. The television host-turned-president was able to direct the show and, even after disappearing behind the curtain, emerge as the central player behind the insurrection. But the defense found refuge in stretching the definition of “free speech” to its illogical limits.

3. Politics

And the case was a political case, namely the fate and future of the Republican Party. As some GOP senators sat stony-faced while others seemed genuinely moved, one could not help but wonder which Republican Party would win the day — the new “base” of the Trump Republican Party or the old, middle-of-the-road Republicans who believe in moderation and getting things done. Voters matter to both political parties, and the impeachment managers sought to appeal to Republicans’ sense of patriotism and common sense. 

“My dear colleagues,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said, “is there any political leader in this room who believes if he’s ever allowed by the Senate to get back into the Oval Office, Donald Trump would stop inciting violence to get his way?” 

4. History and public opinion

At the end of the day, the impeachment managers were speaking to generations of citizens and scholars today and tomorrow who will learn about and judge a piece of the American presidency through the lens of the events of Jan. 6, 2021. The conclusion will be that a bad president did terrible things to democracy and that a bipartisan group of senators were able to vote on his impeachment. That verdict is likely to be the harshest and the most important. As the writer James Baldwin said, “People are trapped in history and history is trapped in them.”

Tara D. Sonenshine is a former U.S. under-secretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs.