Should the power to impeach US presidents be abolished?

In the three impeachment trials of the last 30 years, votes in both the House and Senate split almost exactly down party lines.

In each case there were a few cross-over votes, but they were the exceptions that prove the rule.

In federal court cases between 1980 and 1997, hung juries only ever occurred in about 2% of cases. Yet in the two articles of impeachment that Clinton faced in the Senate and the three articles that Trump was tried on, the Senate returned the equivalent of hung juries 100% of the time.

Ignore your feelings about Clinton and Trump; focus on the actions of the Senators. They’re elected to serve the American people. The American people aren’t able to try the President that they elected. The American people give that power to the Senators.

The Senators are meant to listen to the evidence presented to them and make a decision on guilt or innocence based on that evidence. That’s the promise they make to their constituents.

Clearly, that’s not what they’re doing. The experience of federal court juries tells us that a hung Senate should have been unusual in even just one of the articles of impeachment. To be hung in all five tells us that they ignored the evidence and their promise to serve the people and instead served their respective political parties.

Imagine if every defendant in court got to pick six or so members of the jury from their family and friends. No-one would ever be found guilty and the USA would be overrun with criminals. Rather like the federal government, some might say.

Have you ever thought, the average American might be better off if their Representatives and Senators voted for what they thought would be best for their constituents, instead of political parties that work for the wealthy? And I don’t mean just during impeachments, but every time they vote in Congress.

Maybe then the poorest 50% of Americans would have a greater share of the country’s wealth than just 2.5% and the wealthiest 10% wouldn’t be hoarding 67.4% of all the wealth.

What you just read? ☝ Shouldn't more people read it?
Share it now, before you forget

Feel free to share the complete post

Click to copy post textIn the three impeachment trials of the last 30 years, votes in both the House and Senate split almost exactly down party lines. In each case there were a few cross-over votes, but they were the exceptions that prove the rule. In federal court cases between 1980 and 1997, hung juries only ever occurred in about 2% of cases. Yet in the two articles of impeachment that Clinton faced in the Senate and the three articles that Trump was tried on, the Senate returned the equivalent of hung juries 100% of the time. Ignore your feelings about Clinton and Trump; focus on the actions of the Senators. They're elected to serve the American people. The American people aren't able to try the President that they elected. The American people give that power to the Senators. The Senators are meant to listen to the evidence presented to them and make a decision on guilt or innocence based on that evidence. That's the promise they make to their constituents. Clearly, that's not what they're doing. The experience of federal court juries tells us that a hung Senate should have been unusual in even just one of the articles of impeachment. To be hung in all five tells us that they ignored the evidence and their promise to serve the people and instead served their respective political parties. Imagine if every defendant in court got to pick six or so members of the jury from their family and friends. No-one would ever be found guilty and the USA would be overrun with criminals. Rather like the federal government, some might say. Have you ever thought, the average American might be better off if their Representatives and Senators voted for what they thought would be best for their constituents, instead of political parties that work for the wealthy? And I don't mean just during impeachments, but every time they vote in Congress. Maybe then the poorest 50% of Americans would have a greater share of the country's wealth than just 2.5% and the wealthiest 10% wouldn't be hoarding 67.4% of all the wealth.

Thank you

Should the power to impeach US presidents be abolished? © 2025 by Jethro H. Forclift is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0