In light of our time constraints, I would like to focus my remarks today primarily on the one issue--more than any other--that has arisen during our deliberations: namely, whether the President should be convicted if we find he committed the acts alleged in the Articles. I believe this issue is not only central to the case at hand, it is also central to all future evaluations and applications of what we do here. In arguing for the President, White House lawyers have asserted that the threshold for Presidential removal must be very high--and I agree. At the same time, however, we must remember that there is an inverse relationship between the level at which we set the removal bar and the degree of Presidential misconduct we will accept. So, then, where do we set the bar? As we know, 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. Now it has been suggested by some that a 'high Crime' must be a truly heinous crime. But that interpretation is obviously wrong. Treason is certainly among the most heinous crimes. But bribery is not. Taking a bribe, like treason, is however, a uniquely serious act of misconduct by a public official. That suggests a different meaning for 'high Crime,' one that is linked somehow to the fact that the person committing it holds public office.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the standards for presidential removal during impeachment proceedings.
Share
More from Ralph Lee Abraham
Well, I guess that is my concern, is that I don't want---- Venezuela or Russia or China paying Cuba's bill because then they become a puppet government of that country.
The best way forward for the United States to maintain its leadership position in space exploration utilization is to support our Nation's work and investment in rocket propulsion.
It would have been substantially more helpful for DHS to have been present today, to be part of the dialogue, inform the American public, and answer questions about their work in this area.
I remain very concerned that the VA is not yet appropriately prioritizing its workload and properly safeguarding taxpayer funds.





