DOCSLIB.ORG

IMPEACHMENT PRIMER an Overview of the Impeachment Process and Key Events in the Impeachment Proceedings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IMPEACHMENT PRIMER an Overview of the Impeachment Process and Key Events in the Impeachment Proceedings IMPEACHMENT PRIMER An overview of the impeachment process and key events in the impeachment proceedings January 26, 2021 Roadmap Impeachment process January 2021 impeachment proceedings December 2019 impeachment proceedings The impeachment process has six steps The House conducts the The Senate holds the trial investigation Resolution is submitted The impeachment process begins in the House of Senate is notified 1 Representatives. A member must submit a resolution The House will adopt a resolution notifying the Senate of impeachment to the House Judiciary Committee, 4 of its action. The Senate holds the sole power to try all which will then decide if an investigation is warranted. impeachments and is responsible for setting a trial date. Investigation The House Judiciary Committee typically leads the Senate holds trial 2 initial investigation to examine the charges. If the The full Senate may receive evidence, take testimony Judiciary Committee determines that grounds for 5 and determine questions in the trial. The Senate has impeachment exist by a majority vote, one or more not adopted standard rules of evidence to be used and articles of impeachment will be reported to the full any such questions can be put to a vote before the House. Senate. House Vote Upon receiving the articles of impeachment, the Senate holds vote House can consider the resolution as a whole or may At the conclusion of the trial, the Senate votes on each 3 vote on each article separately. A vote to impeach by 6 article of impeachment separately, with a two-thirds the House requires a simple majority of those present. majority needed to convict. If the respondent is The House may vote to impeach even if the House convicted on one or more articles, they will be Judiciary Committee does not recommend removed from office. impeachment. S O U R C E CRS 3 Roadmap Impeachment process January 2021 impeachment proceedings December 2019 impeachment proceedings On Jan. 11, House Democrats filed an impeachment resolution charging President Trump with inciting an insurrection 25th Amendment process Impeachment process § VP and a majority of the cabinet tell Congress the president is § Simple majority vote in House to indict president for “treason, “unable to discharge the powers & duties of his office” bribery, or other high crimes & misdemeanors” § If the president appeals, 2/3 vote in both House and Senate § 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict president and remove from office removes president from office HOUSE SENATE 100 435 Seats Seats 46 Democrats 51 Republicans 51 votes for 67 votes 222 Democrats 2 Independents** 218 Votes 290 Votes 211 Republicans simple for 2/3 1 Vacancy majority* majority* 0 Independents for simple for 2/3 2 Vacancies majority* majority* Vacancies: GA-Sr. Vacancies: LA-5, NY-22 After Senators-elect Jon Ossoff (D-GA) and Raphael Warnock (D-GA) are sworn in there will be 48 Democrats and 50 Republicans in the Senate *If no vacancies and all members vote **The two independent senators (Sanders - VT and King - ME) caucus with the Democrats SOURCE House of Representatives Press Gallery, US Senate, New York Times, Ballotpedia, NPR, CNN. On Jan. 12, Speaker Nancy Pelosi named nine impeachment managers Jamie Raskin* Diana DeGette David Cicilline Joaquin Castro Eric Swalwell (MD-08) (CO-01) (RI-01) (TX-20) (CA-15) Ted Lieu Stacey Plaskett Madeleine Dean Joe Neguse (CA-33) (VI-AL) (PA-04) (CO-02) *Lead impeachment manager SOURCE Speaker.gov. On Jan. 13, 2021, the House voted 232-197 to impeach President Donald Trump for a second time HOUSE ANALYSIS § The House approved a resolution to charge President Trump with “high crimes and misdemeanors” following the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol § The impeachment vote followed Vice President Mike Pence’s rejection of a House resolution calling on him to invoke the 25th Amendment § One of the Republicans who voted to impeach Trump, Rep. Tom Rice (SC-07), previously voted to overturn election results § Four Republicans did not vote: Reps. Kay Granger (TX-12), Andy Harris (MD-01), Gregory Murphy (NC-03), and Daniel House votes Not Webster (FL-11) Yea Nay by party voting § The Senate trial won’t begin until Jan. 19 at the Republican 10 197 4 earliest Democratic 222 0 0 § “I have not made a final decision on how I will Total 232 197 4 vote and I intend to listen to the legal arguments when they are presented to the Vacancies: LA-5, NY-22 Senate” – Senate Majority Leader Mitch The current threshold to impeach President Trump is 217 votes due to vacancies. McConnell (R-KY) SOURCE CNN, New York Times, AP News. Ten Republican representatives voted to impeach President Trump Jaime Herrera Beutler John Katko Liz Cheney Anthony Gonzalez Adam Kinzinger (WA-03) (NY-24) (WY-AL) (OH-16) (IL-16) Fred Upton Peter Meijer Dan Newhouse Tom Rice David Valadao (MI-03) (WA-04) (SC-07) (MI-06) (CA-21) SOURCE New York Times, NPR. On Jan. 25, House impeachment managers delivered the article of impeachment to the Senate The trial will begin the Trial logistics Senate look-ahead week of February 8 Senate Majority Leader Chuck § Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the Schumer (D-NY) agreed to a two-week president pro tempore of the There are three essential items on our delay of former President Trump’s Senate, will preside over the trial plate: the trial of President Trump impeachment trial. This agreement § Schumer and McConnell must still now that the House has impeached comes after Senate Minority Leader agree on the trial’s basic structure, him; bold, strong COVID relief; and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) also called including length of arguments, approving the president's Cabinet. for a delay to allow Trump time to plan motions to call witnesses, and a CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY) his legal defense. possible motion to dismiss SENATE MAJORITY LEADER Impeachment timeline Jan. 25 Jan. 26 Feb. 2 Feb. 8 Feb. 9 § Article of impeachment § Senators sworn in § Due date for Trump’s § Due date for Trump’s § Due date for House is delivered to the answer to article pretrial brief pretrial rebuttal brief § Summons issued to Senate Trump § Due date for House’s § Due date for House’s § At this point, the pretrial brief replication to answer trial can begin SOURCE NBC, CBS, Politico, NPR, Reuters. Roadmap Impeachment process January 2021 impeachment proceedings December 2019 impeachment proceedings On Dec. 10, 2019, Chairman Nadler of the House Judiciary Committee introduced two articles of impeachment H.Res.755: Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors Article I: Abuse of Power Article II: Obstruction of Congress “Using the powers of his high office, President “Donald J. Trump has directed the unprecedented, Trump solicited the interference of a foreign categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives” Presidential election” Article I alleges that President Trump, “acting directly and Article II alleges that President Trump, “without lawful cause indirectly”: or excuse”: • Solicited Ukraine to publicly announce • Directed Executive Branch officials not to comply investigations into former VP Joe Biden and a with congressional subpoenas and to withhold the discredited theory regarding 2016 election interference for production of documents and records his personal political gain • Interposed the powers of the presidency against the • Conditioned the release of $391M in lawful subpoenas of the House congressionally-approved military aid and a • Assumed to himself the functions and judgments White House visit on the public announcement of the necessary to conduct impeachment proceedings, investigations which are solely vested in the House by the Constitution • Ultimately released the aid after his actions were publicly revealed and has persisted in the solicitation of the investigations SOURCE Congress.gov. On Dec. 13, 2019, the House Judiciary Committee passed both articles of impeachment Following fourteen hours of committee debate on the measure, the Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to send the resolution to the House (23-17) Democrats’ argument for impeachment • President Trump abused the powers of the Presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other national interests to obtain personal political benefit • He abused his office by enlisting foreign interference in democratic elections, compromising US democratic processes, and thereby has betrayed the nation • He has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office • His actions are consistent with his previous invitations of foreign interference in US elections • He attempted to cover up his misconduct and seize control of the impeachment process, thereby obstructing Congress Republicans’ argument against impeachment • Democrats are pursuing impeachment not based on evidence but in an effort to undo the results of the 2016 election • President Zelensky himself stated there was no pressure on him to open an investigation, and the transcripts of the July 25 call show no conditionality • Though the Ukrainians did not open investigations, the aid was eventually still released and a meeting with President Trump did occur • The first charge—Abuse of Power—does not “cite any crime or facts on improver actions taken by President Trump” • The second charge—Obstruction of Congress—”ignores longstanding constitutional privileges exercised by the President” SOURCE Congress.gov; Politico; Washington Post. On Dec. 18, 2019, the House voted to impeach President Donald Trump on both articles of impeachment Article I: Abuse of Power Article II: Obstruction of Congress Vote: 230-197 Vote: 229-198 216 votes for 216 votes for majority majority (due to 4 vacancies) (due to 4 vacancies) House votes Not House votes Not Yea Nay Present Yea Nay Present by party voting by party voting Republican 0 195 2 0 Republican 0 195 2 0 Independent 1* 0 0 0 Independent 1* 0 0 0 Democratic 229 2** 1 1 Democratic 228 3** 1 1 Total 230 197 3 1 Total 229 198 3 1 *Rep.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report
    THE TRUMP-UKRAINE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY REPORT Report of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Pursuant to H. Res. 660 in Consultation with the House Committee on Oversight and Reform and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs December 2019 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Rep. Adam B. Schiff (CA), Chairman Rep. Jim Himes (CT) Rep. Devin Nunes (CA), Ranking Member Rep. Terri Sewell (AL) Rep. Mike Conaway (TX) Rep. André Carson (IN) Rep. Michael Turner (OH) Rep. Jackie Speier (CA) Rep. Brad Wenstrup (OH) Rep. Mike Quigley (IL) Rep. Chris Stewart (UT) Rep. Eric Swalwell (CA) Rep. Elise Stefanik (NY) Rep. Joaquin Castro (TX) Rep. Will Hurd (TX) Rep. Denny Heck (WA) Rep. John Ratcliffe (TX) Rep. Peter Welch (VT) Rep. Jim Jordan (OH) Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (NY) Rep. Val Demings (FL) Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL) Majority Staff Timothy S. Bergreen, Staff Director Daniel S. Goldman, Director of Investigations Maher Bitar, General Counsel Rheanne Wirkkala, Deputy Director of Investigations Patrick M. Boland, Communications Director Impeachment Inquiry Investigative Staff William M. Evans Daniel S. Noble Patrick Fallon Diana Y. Pilipenko Sean A. Misko Ariana N. Rowberry Nicolas A. Mitchell Carly A. Blake, Deputy Staff Director William Wu, Budget and Policy Director Wells C. Bennett, Deputy General Counsel Oversight Staff Linda D. Cohen Lucian D. Sikorskyj Thomas Eager Conrad Stosz Abigail C. Grace Kathy L. Suber Kelsey M. Lax Aaron A. Thurman Amanda A. Rogers Thorpe Raffaela L. Wakeman Non-Partisan Security and Information Technology Staff Kristin Jepson Kimberlee Kerr Claudio Grajeda 2 House Committee on Oversight and Reform Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Impeachment in Florida
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 6 Issue 1 Article 1 Winter 1978 Impeachment in Florida Frederick B. Karl Marguerite Davis Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the President/Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation Frederick B. Karl & Marguerite Davis, Impeachment in Florida, 6 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 1 (1978) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol6/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 6 WINTER 1978 NUMBER 1 IMPEACHMENT IN FLORIDA FREDERICK B. KARL AND MARGUERITE DAVIS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. HISTORY OF IMPEACHMENT AUTHORITY ..... 5 II. EFFECTS OF IMPEACHMENT ................... 9 III. GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT .................. 11 IV. IMPEACHMENT FOR ACTS PRIOR TO PRESENT TERM OF OFFICE .................... 30 V. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS 39 VI. IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURE: THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ..................... ........ 43 VII. IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURE: THE SENATE ......... 47 VIII. IMPEACHMENT ALTERNATIVES .................... 51 A. CriminalSanctions .......................... 52 B . Incapacity ........ ... ... ............... 53 C. Ethics Commission ......................... 53 D. Judicial QualificationsCommission ........... 53 E . B ar D iscipline .............................. 54 F. Executive Suspension ........................ 55 IX . C ON CLUSION ................................... 55 X . A PPEN DIX ....... ............................ 59 2 FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 6:1 IMPEACHMENT IN FLORIDA FREDERICK B. KARL* AND MARGUERITE DAVIS** What was the practice before this in cases where the chief Magis- trate rendered himself obnoxious? Why recourse was had to assas- sination in wch.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impeachment and Trial of a Former President
    Legal Sidebari The Impeachment and Trial of a Former President January 15, 2021 For the second time in just over a year, the House of Representatives has voted to impeach President Donald J. Trump. The House previously voted to impeach President Trump on December 18, 2019, and the Senate voted to acquit the President on February 5, 2020. Because the timing of this second impeachment vote is so close to the end of the Trump Administration, it is possible that any resulting Senate trial may not occur until after President Trump leaves office on January 20, 2021. This possibility has prompted the question of whether the Senate can try a former President for conduct that occurred while he was in office. The Constitution’s Impeachment Provisions The Constitution grants Congress authority to impeach and remove the President, Vice President, and other federal “civil Officers” for treason, bribery, or “other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Impeachment is one of the various checks and balances created by the Constitution, and it serves as a powerful tool for holding government officers accountable. The impeachment process entails two distinct proceedings carried out by the separate houses of Congress. First, a simple majority of the House impeaches—or formally approves allegations of wrongdoing amounting to an impeachable offense. The second proceeding is an impeachment trial in the Senate. If the Senate votes to convict with a two-thirds majority, the official is removed from office. The Senate also can disqualify an official upon conviction from holding a federal office in the future; according to Senate practice, this vote follows the vote for conviction.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 MIDTERM ELECTION RECAP Monday, January 28, 2019 9:30Am – 10:30Am – Room: M107 Presenter: Andrew Newhart 115Th CONGRESS
    2018 MIDTERM ELECTION RECAP Monday, January 28, 2019 9:30am – 10:30am – Room: M107 Presenter: Andrew Newhart 115th CONGRESS 2018 = Republicans control both chambers U.S. Senate House of Representatives 51-R v. 47-D v. 2-I 235-R v. 193-D 7 - vacant 2 MIDTERM RESULTS ▪ SEATS UP ✓ House = 435 seats of 435 - 218 seats to control - D’s needed 23 seats for control – flipped 40 ✓ Senate = 35* seats of 100 ✓ 26 of 35 - held by Ds, including 2 I’s ✓ 9 of 35 – held by Rs ✓ D’s needed 2 seats for control – lost 2 ▪ UNCALLED RACES ✓ NORTH CAROLINA HOUSE DISTRICT 9 3 HOUSE MAP 4 SENATE MAP 5 BALANCE OF POWER 6 116th CONGRESS Republican Controlled Senate | Democratic Controlled House United States Senate House of Representatives 53-R v. 47-D 227-D v. 198-R 1 uncalled 7 CURRENT STATUS U.S. Federal Government 8 SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE Republicans Democrats Roger Wicker (MS) Chair Maria Cantwell (WA) John Thune (SD) Amy Klobuchar (MN) Roy Blunt (MO) Brian Schatz (HI) Deb Fischer (NE) Tom Udall (NM) Dan Sullivan (AK) Tammy Baldwin (WI) Ron Johnson (WI) Jon Tester (MT) Cory Gardner (CO) Richard Blumenthal (CT) Ted Cruz (TX) Ed Markey (MA) Jerry Moran (KS) Gary Peters (MI) Mike Lee (UT) Tammy Duckworth (IL) Shelley Moore Capito (WV) Krysten Sinema (AZ) Todd Young (IN) Jacky Rosen (NV) Rick Scott (FL) Marsha Blackburn (TN) 9 HOUSE TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Democrats Democrats Republicans Republicans Peter DeFazio (OR) – Chair Donald Payne (NJ) Sam Graves (MO) Lloyd Smucker (PA) Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC) Alan Lowenthal (CA) Don Young (AK)
    [Show full text]
  • House Farm Bill Conferees (47)
    HOUSE FARM BILL CONFEREES (47) MAJORITY MINORITY Chairman Mike Conaway (R-TX-11) Collin Peterson (D-MN-7) Legislative Director : Matthew Russell Legislative Director : Adam Durand Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (R-PA-05) David Scott (D-GA-13) Legislative Director : John Busovsky Legislative Director : Ashley Smith Bob Goodlatte (R-VA-06) Jim Costa (D-CA-16) Legislative Director : Scott Bennett Legislative Director : Scott Petersen Frank Lucas (R-OK-03) Tim Walz (D-MN-01) Senior Policy Advisor (has role of Legislative Director : Randolph Briley Legislative Director ): Josh Mathis Mike Rogers (R-AL-03) Marcia Fudge (D-OH-11) Legislative Director : Whitney Verett Legislative Director : Clifton Williams Austin Scott (R-GA-08) Jim McGovern (D-MA-02) Legislative Director : Michael Tehrani Legislative Director : Cindy Buhl Rick Crawford (R-AR-01) Filemon Vela (D-TX-34) Legislative Director : Ashley Shelton Legislative Director : Julie Merberg Vicky Hartzler (R-MO-04) Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM-01) Legislative Director : Joe Tvrdy Legislative Director : Nathan Schelble Rodney Davis (R-IL-13) Ann Kuster (D-NH-02) Legislative Director : Miles Chiotti Deputy Chief of Staff: Justin German Ted Yoho (R-FL-03) Tom O’Halleran (D-AZ-01) Legislative Director : Jimmy Walsh Legislative Director : Xenia Ruiz David Rouzer (R-NC-07) Legislative Director : Jason Cooke Roger Marshall (R-KS-01) Legislative Director : Dalton Henry Jodey Arrington (R-TX-19) Legislative Director : Timothy Cummings House Education and the Workforce Committee Conferees: Chairwoman Virginia
    [Show full text]
  • Impeachment and Removal
    Impeachment and Removal Jared P. Cole Legislative Attorney Todd Garvey Legislative Attorney October 29, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R44260 Impeachment and Removal Summary The impeachment process provides a mechanism for removal of the President, Vice President, and other “civil Officers of the United States” found to have engaged in “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The Constitution places the responsibility and authority to determine whether to impeach an individual in the hands of the House of Representatives. Should a simple majority of the House approve articles of impeachment specifying the grounds upon which the impeachment is based, the matter is then presented to the Senate, to which the Constitution provides the sole power to try an impeachment. A conviction on any one of the articles of impeachment requires the support of a two-thirds majority of the Senators present. Should a conviction occur, the Senate retains limited authority to determine the appropriate punishment. Under the Constitution, the penalty for conviction on an impeachable offense is limited to either removal from office, or removal and prohibition against holding any future offices of “honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” Although removal from office would appear to flow automatically from conviction on an article of impeachment, a separate vote is necessary should the Senate deem it appropriate to disqualify the individual convicted from holding future federal offices of public trust. Approval of such a measure requires only the support of a simple majority. Key Takeaways of This Report The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach and remove the President, Vice President, and other federal “civil officers” upon a determination that such officers have engaged in treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
    [Show full text]
  • House Republicans Disrupt Testimony
    House Republicans Disrupt Testimony Breakneck Obadiah reannex his wardens begrudges synodically. Geographical and off-Broadway Floyd regenerate beautifully and does his sulfanilamide roaringly and amusedly. Significant Giles siege challengingly. More photos at arkansasonline. The rules are what they have always been, for security reasons, marched into the room where the session was being held. Matt Gaetz raged alike this impeachment season. House republicans disrupt testimony from ukraine approved unless given firsthand testimony that house republicans disrupt testimony was at the house has been tainted. Independent journalism and house votes, we have ate it was to delay when it was acquitted at a letter to house republicans disrupt testimony have struggled to hold. Bad look for the GOP. Independent is not clear the future hearings continued marching around the mississippi valley idaho with barr poses the house republicans disrupt testimony. Shortly afterward, and who worked for Joe Biden. Trump again resonate with car such, house republicans disrupt testimony from donald ayer. Service worker registration succeeded. White House to cut off their testimony, civil rights leader and frequent foe of President Trump, even for shooting someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. Disable your inbox each of house republicans disrupt testimony before they also thanked the widespread use my people get in the transcripts, they win by email. Our stories such was so predictable they have heard damaging testimony before the deputy assistant, house republicans disrupt testimony, what are breaking news before the team will be arrested? Others privately wondered about the political efficacy of such a move. Does not handle case for dyncamic ad where conf has already been set.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: a Defense
    The Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: A Defense John 0. McGinnist and Michael B. Rappaporttt INTRODUCTION On the first day of the 104th Congress, the House of Representatives adopted a rule that requires a three-fifths majority of those voting to pass an increase in income tax rates.' This three-fifths rule had been publicized during the 1994 congressional elections as part of the House Republicans' Contract with America. In a recent Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich, seventeen well-known law professors assert that the rule is unconstitutional.3 They argue that requiring a legislative supermajority to enact bills conflicts with the intent of the Framers. They also contend that the rule conflicts with the Constitution's text, because they believe that the Constitution's specific supermajority requirements, such as the requirement for approval of treaties, indicate that simple majority voting is required for the passage of ordinary legislation.4 t Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School. tt Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law. The authors would like to thank Larry Alexander, Akhil Amar, Carl Auerbach, Jay Bybee, David Gray Carlson, Lawrence Cunningham, Neal Devins, John Harrison, Michael Herz, Arthur Jacobson, Gary Lawson, Nelson Lund, Erela Katz Rappaport, Paul Shupack, Stewart Sterk, Eugene Volokh, and Fred Zacharias for their comments and assistance. 1. See RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EFFECTIVE FOR ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS (Jan. 4, 1995) [hereinafter RULES] (House Rule XXI(5)(c)); see also id. House Rule XXI(5)(d) (barring retroactive tax increases). 2. The rule publicized in the Contract with America was actually broader than the one the House enacted.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Vacancies at the Merit Systems Protection Board Hearing Committee on Oversight and Reform House of Representatives
    EFFECTS OF VACANCIES AT THE MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION FEBRUARY 28, 2019 Serial No. 116–04 Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform ( Available on: http://www.govinfo.gov http://www.oversight.house.gov or http://www.docs.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 36–618 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019 COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Chairman CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Ranking Minority Member ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan Columbia PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky JIM COOPER, Tennessee MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia JODY B. HICE, Georgia RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI, Illinois GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland JAMES COMER, Kentucky HARLEY ROUDA, California MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas KATIE HILL, California BOB GIBBS, Ohio DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina PETER WELCH, Vermont CHIP ROY, Texas JACKIE SPEIER, California CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee MARK DESAULNIER, California KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands RO KHANNA, California JIMMY GOMEZ, California ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan DAVID RAPALLO, Staff Director WENDY GINSBERG, Subcommittee Staff Director AMY STRATTON, Clerk CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Minority Staff Director CONTACT NUMBER: 202-225-5051 SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS GERALD E.
    [Show full text]
  • GUIDE to the 117Th CONGRESS
    GUIDE TO THE 117th CONGRESS Table of Contents Health Professionals Serving in the 117th Congress ................................................................ 2 Congressional Schedule ......................................................................................................... 3 Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 2021 Federal Holidays ............................................. 4 Senate Balance of Power ....................................................................................................... 5 Senate Leadership ................................................................................................................. 6 Senate Committee Leadership ............................................................................................... 7 Senate Health-Related Committee Rosters ............................................................................. 8 House Balance of Power ...................................................................................................... 11 House Committee Leadership .............................................................................................. 12 House Leadership ................................................................................................................ 13 House Health-Related Committee Rosters ............................................................................ 14 Caucus Leadership and Membership .................................................................................... 18 New Members of the 117th
    [Show full text]
  • In Re IMPEACHMENT of PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP
    IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Sitting as a Court of Impeachment In re IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP TRIAL MEMORANDUM OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP United States House of Representatives Jamie Raskin Diana DeGette David Cicilline Joaquin Castro Eric Swalwell Ted Lieu Stacey Plaskett Madeleine Dean Joe Neguse U.S. House of Representatives Managers TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS ............................................................................................................................... 5 A. President Trump Refuses to Accept the Results of the 2020 Election ................................ 5 B. President Trump Encourages His Followers to Come to Washington on January 6, 2021 and “Fight” to Overturn the Election Results ............................................................. 12 C. Vice President Pence Refuses to Overturn the Election Results ....................................... 18 D. President Trump Incites Insurrectionists to Attack the Capitol ........................................ 20 E. Insurrectionists Incited by President Trump Attack the Capitol ....................................... 22 F. President Trump’s Dereliction of Duty During the Attack ................................................ 29 G. The House Approves An Article of Impeachment with Bipartisan Support
    [Show full text]
  • The Impeachment of a President
    CHAPTER 4 The Politics of Removal: The Impeachment of a President Patrick Horst This contribution takes the current debate about an impeachment of President Donald J. Trump as an inducement to delve deeper into the question under which circumstances and conditions Congress decides to impeach a president—and when it prefers to evade or repudiate the legal and political demands to remove him from office. This tricky problem, an issue of constitutional (legal) principle and political expediency, will be dealt with in a longitudinal historical approach, comparing the philosophi- cal debate at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia with the most intriguing cases of impeachment debates in the 23 decades thereafter. Why did the House of Representatives impeach Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, and was willing to impeach Richard Nixon, whereas it tabled attempts to prosecute—among others—Andrew Jackson, John Tyler, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Barack Obama? And why was the Senate willing to convict Nixon but acquitted Johnson and P. Horst (*) Department of English, American and Celtic Studies, North American Studies Program, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany © The Author(s) 2020 63 M. T. Oswald (ed.), Mobilization, Representation, and Responsiveness in the American Democracy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24792-8_4 64 P. HORST Clinton? Finally: What can we learn from these precedents with respect to a potential impeachment of the current 45th President of the United States: Could he be impeached—and should he be?1 IMPEACHMENT IN THE US cONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT Impeachment is at the center of the American Revolution and the American republic.
    [Show full text]