‘Obstruction of Congress’ is an utterly ridiculous impeachment charge

If one accepts the Democrats’ tendentious narrative of what transpired on the now-infamous July 25 smartphone name between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, their “abuse of power” impeachment article arguably matches inside Alexander Hamilton’s description, in Federalist 65, of the Constitution’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” as an “abuse or violation of some public trust.” But their “obstruction of Congress” charge fails.



Worse, it is completely nonsensical and misunderstands and undermines the complete separation-of-powers framework upon which our constitutional republic was once built. To talk of a president “obstructing” Congress is to speak of recognizing a unicorn. It is a nonsensical fantasy. And leveling the very allegation, in the first instance, evinces a vital constitutional illiteracy.



Our tripartite separation-of-powers edifice was rarely devised for the motive of ensuring amiability between the legislative, govt and judicial branches. On the contrary, the Framers envisioned a countrywide authorities in which the three branches existed in a country of continuous, unyielding anxiety with one another.




In particular, the two political branches — Congress and the govt branch — had been supposed to be jealous guardians of their very own ambits and spheres of influence. Ceaseless tussling between them was to be the norm. “Ambition,” James Madison told us in Federalist 51, “must be made to counteract ambition.”



Accordingly, inter-branch political showdowns are routine. The president can veto legislation. Congress, the use of its power-of-the-purse prerogative, can defund presidential priorities. And so forth. Each department has a range of tools at its disposal to help “counteract [the] ambition” of the other.



That is how our separation of powers is supposed to feature — in a nation far closer to animosity than to geniality. Which is precisely why House Democrats alleging “obstruction of Congress” as an article of impeachment makes no sense.


If the president disagrees with what Congress is doing, then he have to lawfully obstruct or impede its efforts. And the desirable way for Congress to push back on a frustrative president is not to inn to the severe and uniquely anti-democratic treatment of impeachment but to genuinely defund his legislative priorities or perhaps force a authorities shutdown.



Fact is, it is wholly unsuitable — and counter to the spirit embodied in our constitutional framework — for Congress to strive to impeach the president for obstructing its congressional responsibilities. To pout over purported “obstruction of Congress” is to moan that the president is reasserting the truism that he is, in fact, a separate department of government and succesful of pushing returned on the other branches.



By attempting to impeach the president because he wields presidential power, House Democrats divulge that it is they themselves who are the ones abusing power.



By contrast, an article of impeachment for “obstruction of justice,” specifically if it have been to entail the president without delay defying a judicial order to heed a congressional subpoena, would raise greater heft. Obstruction of justice has traditionally been referred to in articles of impeachment. Not so the utter fabrication that is “obstruction of Congress.”


In resigning themselves to such a farcical impeachment article, especially in lieu of their nixing previously floated articles pertaining to either bribery or the Mueller report, House Democrats have hoisted themselves on their own petard. They have finally laid out their poker hand for the American people to see; turns out they were bluffing all along.

Their ruse, which is already polling heavily underwater in many pivotal swing states, will only go further south from here. Speaker Nancy Pelosi will likely be able to cobble together a bare majority to impeach, but the president’s inevitable acquittal in the Senate will redound to Republicans’ electoral interest next November.

To impeach for “obstruction of Congress” is akin to impeaching James Madison, the father of the Constitution, himself. And as much as modern Democrats loathe constitutional guardrails, surely that is too much for the American people as a whole.

Josh Hammer is editor-at-large of The Daily Wire and of counsel at First Liberty Institute.

ARTICLE SOURCE: https://nypost.com/2019/12/13/obstruction-of-congress-is-an-utterly-ridiculous-impeachment-charge/?fbclid=IwAR3puK_DENm_Qw_LT2rbMg1jF5Dvt35k-5PmE2gmGh6XnD7jNYljs-YJHzI