President Gerald Ford once famously said, “An impeachable offense is whatever the House of Representatives says it is.” If I recall correctly, there have been twenty impeachment actions brought by the House of Representatives, most against judges. Results at trial have been mixed, especially regarding Presidents, in part because it requires a two-thirds majority of the Senate to convict. Four of the accused had charges dismissed, in all but one case because the accused had already left office. Eight were convicted, all judges. There has never been a President convicted at an impeachment trial.

Impeachment is meant to remove an official from office to prevent doing further harm. It is not intended to punish, except for removing the official from the Federal payroll. Its use should be rare and judiciously applied; in my opinion, that means with a view to the future so as to prevent further harm and discourage similar acts. All three of the presidential impeachment efforts have resulted in acquittal. The basis in each case seems to be a jockeying for political position or advantage, not prevention of harm.

The first case, Andrew Jackson, was accused of violating the law by dismissing his Secretary of War from office without congressional approval. The constitution appears clear to me about separation of powers, and the law itself violated that principle. Of course, I am not an attorney; neither were most of the men who crafted the constitution.

The second case was Bill Clinton, accused of perjury and abuse of power. At trial, he was acquitted by the Senate, as the partisans in the House who brought the charges knew he would be. Robert Byrd, former member of the Ku Klux Klan a Democratic Senator from West Virginia, gave the speech of his career in announcing his vote to acquit. We would do well to ponder it. Here are some quotes by Senator Robert Byrd:

Mr. Clinton's offenses do, in my judgment, constitute an 'abuse or violation of some public trust.' Reasonable men and women can, of course, differ with my viewpoint.

Should Mr. Clinton be removed from office for these impeachable offenses? This question gives me great pause. The answer is, as it was intended to be by the framers, a difficult calculus. This is without question the most difficult, wrenching and soul-searching vote that I have ever, ever cast in my 46 years in Congress. A vote to convict carries with it an automatic removal of the President from office. It is not a two-step process. Senators can't vote maybe. The only vote that the Senator can cast, under the rules, as written, is a vote either to convict and remove or a vote to acquit.

The American people deeply believe in fairness, and they have come to view the President as having 'been put upon' for politically partisan reasons. They think that the House proceedings were unfair. History, too, will see it that way. The people believe that the Independent Counsel, Mr. Starr, had motivations which went beyond the duties strictly assigned to him.

In the end, the people's perception of this entire matter as being driven by political agendas all around, and the resulting lack of support for the President's removal, tip the scales for allowing this President to serve out the remaining 22 months of his term, as he was elected to do. When the people believe that we who have been entrusted with their proxies, have been motivated mostly or solely by political partisanship on a matter of such momentous import as the removal from office of a twice-elected President, wisdom dictates that we turn away from that dramatic step. To drop the sword of Damocles now, given the bitter political partisanship surrounding this entire matter, would only serve to further undermine a public trust that is too much damaged already. Therefore, I will reluctantly vote to acquit.

The full text of the speech is available here.

The current support by Speaker Pelosi for impeachment of Trump will make the Clinton debacle look like a Sunday church picnic. She is clearly seeking short-term political partisan advantage, by forcing Republicans to vote publicly on whether or not to impeach. That will drive further division in the country. I don’t approve of Trump’s remarks, but do they rise to the level of an impeachable offense? I don’t approve of mob violence as occurred in Congress, but is the best solution to tell half the country you’re now censored, deplatformed, not allowed in public, cancelled, and we’re here to shit on your grave?

The first thing I want to hear from President-elect Biden on Monday morning is that he urges Democrats to cool their jets. If the purpose is to remove Trump from office, that was done in November. If the purpose is anything else, it has no place in America