Donald John Trump, President Trump discussed on Pacifica Evening News

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Trump I yield back with that vote the house of representatives has impeached president Donald John trump making him the third president to be impeached in American history it also marks the first time the house has a pitch to Republican president at the first focus on an article of impeachment charging trump with abuse of power the house later voted on the second article of impeachment obstruction of Congress the house heard lengthy debate before votes on the floor Democrat house speaker Nancy C. to one democratic house speaker Nancy Pelosi of California cave in opening statement supporting impeachment and that's Christopher Martinez reporting gill Richard Paul is a professor of constitutional and international law at the Hastings school of law in San Francisco and his most recent book without precedent Chief Justice John Marshall and his times is about the most influential Chief Justice in the history of the United States Supreme Court Paul took an historical approach in commenting on today's historical session of the house of representatives historians in the future I could have a very difficult time trying to encapsulate and explain what has transpired in the trump presidency it is very difficult to understand how does one man has so corrupted publican party so that they we now have these Republicans standing up and essentially pending what is clearly a Russian propaganda line that accuses Ukraine of interfering in our elections in twenty sixteen and accuses the Titans of something which we know they didn't do and so it it just it gets hurt it's a strange moment I think and a difficult one to I understand and I think years from now we'll look back and scratch our heads and just wonder how the hell that happened it's just hard for me to I understand that based on a on the facts themselves how you can defend the president's actions I I the the argument that the Republicans seem to be making repeatedly in use today what is that no crime was committed but that's not the standard never has been the standard impeachment going back to the very first impeachment the impeachment of John Pickering who is a judge in New Hampshire back in eighteen oh four he was impeached for drunk at this and then Samuel chase who was a justice of the Supreme Court was impeached and he was impeached for essentially being too partisan on the court so it's never been the standard that you had to have committed a crime manager Johnson was impeached he didn't commit a crime he fathered wanted a cabinet secretaries and that was the grounds for impeachment so I I don't know how you can defend this when the fever subside and we we see that in fact all of the witnesses have lined up the same way the White House has produced no exculpatory evidence there's been no effort by the Republicans to explain what the motivation was for withholding the eight in the first place or why the president suddenly released the eight other than the fact that his his corrupt bargain was exposed by a whistle blower so I don't know how else can come out hello this claim that this is an illegitimate impeachment even then we've heard it constantly today in the debate from the house floor but even Donald Trump yesterday and his six page letter to Nancy Pelosi said it was unconstitutional and illegal is is there anything about the process that you seen that would at least give some some some concern to an impartial observer was concerned about how the constitution works right on well in terms of the process claims made by the Republicans it's quite standard in any criminal investigation that initially you begin by taking depositions in secret because you don't want perspective witnesses coordinating their testimony so that's what happened in the first stage in terms of the indeed occasions by the intelligence committee and then in the second stage of any investigation we typically have a grand jury in which the defendant does not participate in the grand jury proceeding Saint Pete that's what happened in this case with the intelligence committee began calling witnesses publicly Republicans and Democrats had equal time in both of those first two phases is the third phase when it went to the Judiciary Committee the president and his attorneys were invited to come they were invited to participate they chose not to participate so the procedural objections to the Republicans keep raising don't really make any sense that this is all very standard kinds of ways in which legal investigations are conducted I think what is significant to me is the unwillingness of the Republicans to allow witnesses to participate in the trial I don't know what I don't know what a trial is if it is an attempt at trying to substantiate fax if you don't have to wait if you don't have evidence presented then what is the trial going to be about if it's simply going to be a book of folk between you know shirts and skins we don't need to have a trial and that I guess is the impetus now for the suggestion that the Democrats might not allow the that they might not allow the impeachment to go forward to the Senate they may simply stop with impeachment and not go through this farce of the trial Joel Richard Paul professor of constitutional law at Hastings school of law in San Francisco talking image Jesuit co host of caveat is live coverage of today's house vote to impeach president trump on two counts in your listening to the evening news on KPFA Berkeley KPFK Los Angeles KFC of Fresno online at KPFA dot org tens of thousands of people took part in an estimated six hundred rallies across the country last night supporting president trump's impeachment including hundreds in San Francisco wait in line and we need elections national security and we this kind of collection the running country finally brought up these articles of impeachment it's a problem that the basis they bought these articles up on.

Coming up next