The United States Constitution is pretty clear on the process of impeachment and removal of the president. Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5, states in part:
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7, spell out the Senate’s role:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
And finally, Article 2, Section 4, states:
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.
Notice what’s missing? The Constitution is mute on the rescinding of any previous impeachment. That’s where Republican Representative Darrel Issa (CA-48) is trying to work in a proposed resolution to reverse the two Democrat-run, arguably phony impeachments of President Donald Trump.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., has introduced a resolution aimed at reversing the two impeachments of President Donald Trump in the House of Representatives in a move he says will rectify a situation where Democrats used “knowingly false” claims in a partisan attempt to destroy the president’s reputation.
The resolution, H.Res.1211, referred to the House Judiciary Committee, declares that both of Trump’s impeachments, approved by the House in 2019 and 2021, should be formally “expunged as if such Article had never passed the full House of Representatives.”
“The fact is that the Constitution doesn’t spell out what to do when you’ve wrongfully indicted somebody,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “An impeachment is basically an indictment and it’s an indictment that you can’t really be acquitted from. If you are impeached by the House, famously where do you go to get your reputation back, is the question,”
This is an interesting proposal, but one could be forgiven for thinking that this resolution, should it pass, would be instantly challenged, even though it is frankly a symbolic gesture.
Read More: Boom: CNN Host Obliterates Dem Narrative About Removing Trump From Office
Democrats Seeking to Hold ‘Shadow Hearings’ to Plan for Impeaching Trump on Day 1 If They Take the House
Rep. Issa compares the act of impeachment to issuing an indictment, and in this, he is correct. But the Senate trial is where the charges in the indictment are tried, corresponding to a criminal trial, and in both of the Democrat-run, vindictive impeachments, President Trump was acquitted by the Senate. As I understand it, being acquitted in a criminal trial doesn’t also require filing a motion to rescind the indictment; the acquittal itself resolves the case.
Add that to the questionable constitutionality of the process, and it’s enough to make one wonder if House Republicans really are gaining anything by spending time on this. President Trump was acquitted in the Senate. The matter is closed. The House has important business to deal with, and it’s hard to see the value in getting drawn into what can only really be seen as a distraction. This proposal, should it pass, would likely only lead to yet another court fight that we’d be better off without.
Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at RedState, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical Left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve.
Help us continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration and its successes. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
