AS NEWS HEADLINES banner the contentious dealings President Donald Trump had with foreign countries to dig dirt against his political opponents for his personal gains just to win elections and stay in power, a lot of our Kababayans are asking what the 45th president of the United States did to deserve the threats of impeachment.
Trump’s loyal fan base, including his cohorts in the Republican Party, parrot the talking points he has been hammering throughout his presidency, amid reports critical of his leadership, policies, character and performance as president.
They echo Trump’s words that he is the victim here, that the Democrats, mainstream news media, our allies in democracy, and even our own national intelligence community, are all in a mission to unseat him to take away the power from the American people.
The latest and most serious threat to his presidency is the latest developments about his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which comes from the same playbook as his dealings with Russia, Australia, and now even China, as well as his questionable relationships with Saudi Arabia and North Korea, among others.
What did the president do, his followers ask, that the Democratic-lead House of Representatives has already launched and impeachment inquiry against Trump? The short and simple answer: THREATS TO NATIONAL SECURITY.
Foreign countries interfering in our elections, especially at the behest or invitation of the president, compromises our security and national interest — a clear violation of the oath taken by Trump when he was sworn in.
When we talk about national security, we as Americans need to look at this as a non-partisan issue because it involves all of us and the security of our nation. When partisan colors cloud the way we objectively assess what is happening now in America in the age of Trump and decide what should be done, we need to go back to the spirit of the law in the Constitution, as stated by the Founding Fathers against a corrupt government.
As National Public Radio (NPR) reported, “The founders of American democracy could not have anticipated the technology of the 21st century or many of the other changes that have redefined the republic they created.
“But they clearly foresaw one challenge that faces the inheritors of their handiwork – the threat of foreign interference in our elections. The fear of foreign interference was a driving issue in the conversations of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787.”
Quoting some of these statements in their discourse as they were drafting the US Constitution as reported by American Progress:
George Washington, in his farewell address at the end of his presidency, said: “one of the greatest dangers to the United States involved the “insidious wiles” of foreign powers and their multiple avenues to improperly influence our political system. Washington urged Americans “to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
Thomas Jefferson also sounded the alarm about “entanglements” between the United States and foreign governments, which he and other founders viewed with “perfect horror” due to the corruption that could result. Jefferson knew that a republic could not function if its chief executive would abuse his office—and the public trust—by soliciting personal political assistance from a foreign government.
John Adams had similar beliefs, writing to Jefferson in 1787 that he understood Jefferson’s apprehension about “foreign Interference, Intrigue Influence.” Adams, too, was concerned about corruption in the political system, leading him to assert that America should not conduct elections too often. “As often as Elections happen,” Adams wrote, “the danger of foreign Influence recurs.”
Alexander Hamilton warned specifically about a foreign power’s ability to cultivate a president or another top official. In Federalist Paper Number 68, published in 1788, Hamilton wrote:
“These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistry of the Union?”
The framers of the U.S. Constitution, therefore, fearing that presidents or other executive officers might prove disloyal to the country and Constitution they were sworn to protect, drafted the Constitution to include clauses to protect the democracy of the nation.
One such way was through the principle of checks and balances mandated by the Constitution among the three branches of government so that no one person or institution would abuse the power and public trust accorded to them by the government position they hold. The point of checks and balances was to make sure no one branch would be able to control too much power, and it created a separation of powers.
Another guardrail was the Emoluments Clause, prohibiting any government officers from accepting a title or a gift from any foreign government.
As PBS reported, “That part of the Constitution had come to seem antique, as the norms and presumptions of American politics long ago made it hard to imagine a sitting president actually being bribed by a foreign power.”
The report explained how in the present time, with Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments routinely spending lavishly for accommodations at Trump Organization properties in Washington and elsewhere, the word “emolument” has returned to the news.
It cited how “two federal judges at the trial court level have refused to disallow lawsuits (one filed by the District of Columbia and the state of Maryland and another filed by about 200 members of Congress) charging that the Trump businesses are violating the Emoluments Clause. Both courts accepted the definition of emolument as “any profit, gain or advantage.”
Then there is the impeachment clause. The PBS report further discussed how “the framers also feared that presidents or other executive officers might prove disloyal to the country and Constitution they were sworn to protect.
The report stated that the impeachment clause, as originally written, singled out the crimes of treason and bribery as grounds for impeachment.”
The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” was added late in the convention process at the urging of Virginia delegate George Mason, who thought naming just two crimes too restrictive. The more general “high crimes and misdemeanors” was, as historian David O. Stewart has noted, “already archaic in 1787 and has grown more opaque in the years since.”
TRUMP had been investigated in the Mueller probe for Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections — and he said he did not care about such interference. In fact, he sought it because Russia wanted to help him by digging dirt on Hillary Clinton to damage her campaign and help Trump win. In fact, Trump even sided with President Vladimir Putin in his denial of Russia’s assault on our democracy, despite the findings of our own US intelligence community, including the Mueller probe.
Now Trump is at it again. It is either he does not know our Constitution and the laws of the land, or he does know but thinks he is above the law, and will, therefore, doing anything and everything to win the election and stay in power, even if he sells the soul of America and the democracy that this nation has worked so hard for to win and protect, pursuant to the Constitution.
If we are to be faithful to the Constitution, Trump needs to be impeached because our national security and interest are more important than the personal political and financial interest of one man named Donald Trump.
Trump has to go.
* * *
Gel Santos Relos is the anchor of TFC’s “Balitang America.” Views and opinions expressed by the author in this column are solely those of the author and not of Asian Journal and ABS-CBN-TFC. For comments, go to www.TheFil-AmPerspective.com, https://www.facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos.
