Cecily Zamora
The Ukraine call is impeachable because House leadership believes there is enough evidence of wrongdoing to garner enough votes. The alleged offence is that Trump enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. While most scholars agree that to be impeachable, an offence does not need to break the law, there is still the argument of the abuse of power, which adds another layer of misconduct.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Impeachable | Yes |
| Abuse of power | Yes |
| Obstruction of justice | Yes |
| Solicitation of campaign contribution from a foreign government | Yes |
| Campaign finance violation | No |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Abuse of power
Trump's Ukraine call was impeachable because it was believed that he enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. This was an abuse of power, as it was seen as Trump soliciting the help of a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. This was a criminal act, as it bypassed the lawful process to deal with such situations. While it didn't break campaign finance laws, it was still problematic and could be seen as an obstruction of justice. The call was also impeachable because there was enough evidence of wrongdoing to garner enough votes in the House. This evidence was clear, and the offence was clear, which is unusual in impeachment cases.
JFK: Lawbreaker in the White House?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Obstruction of justice
Trump's Ukraine call was impeachable because he enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. This could also be seen as an abuse of power.
Trump's call to Ukraine could be seen as an obstruction of justice. The whistleblower's complaint prompted a referral to the Department of Justice Criminal Division. The division concluded that the call did not constitute a campaign finance violation. However, Federal Election Commission (FEC) chair Ellen Weintraub reiterated that "it is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election".
Trump withheld $391 million in security aid for Ukraine, which Democrats have said was aimed at pressuring Kiev into investigating political rival Joe Biden, the president's possible Democratic opponent in the Nov. 3 election. Trump has denied all wrongdoing.
Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, confirmed in a November 2019 interview that he believed he "needed Yovanovitch out of the way" because she was going to make his investigations difficult. On April 24, 2019, after complaints from Giuliani and other Trump allies that Yovanovitch was undermining and obstructing Trump's efforts to persuade Ukraine to investigate former vice president and 2020 presidential election candidate Joe Biden, Trump ordered Yovanovitch's recall.
Trump's administration's top diplomat to Ukraine, Bill Taylor, testified that he was told aid to Ukraine and a Trump–Zelenskyy White House meeting were conditional on Zelenskyy announcing investigations into the Bidens and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections.
Trump's Campaign Finance Law Violations: What Happened?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Solicitation of campaign contribution from a foreign government
In 2019, Donald Trump was accused of soliciting a campaign contribution from a foreign government, namely Ukraine, in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelensky. The allegation was that Trump had enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. This was seen as an impeachable offence, as it was believed there was enough evidence of wrongdoing to garner enough votes in the House to impeach him. However, it was not believed to be a campaign finance violation.
Trump allegedly withheld military aid to Ukraine to solicit information that would benefit himself, strengthening the argument of the abuse of power. This was seen as problematic because it bypassed the lawful process to deal with such situations. While it didn't break campaign finance laws, it was still seen as misconduct.
Most scholars agree that to be impeachable, an offence does not need to break the law. There only needs to be the political will. That is, there only needs to be enough votes in the House to impeach, and then in the Senate to remove the president from office.
Trump's EEO Law Violation: What's the Verdict?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$0.99 $7.99
Enlisting the help of another country in his campaign for a second term
The Ukraine call is impeachable because House leadership believes there is enough evidence of wrongdoing to garner enough votes. The alleged offence is that Trump enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term.
Trump withheld money from Ukraine to solicit information that would benefit himself, strengthening the argument of the abuse of power and adding another layer of misconduct. This is because it bypasses the lawful process to deal with such situations.
Courtney Simmons Elwood, general counsel for the CIA, made what she considered a criminal referral of the matter during a conference call with the top national security lawyer at the White House and the chief of the Justice Department's National Security Division. A Justice Department official said the call could have broken federal law if Trump's request to the Ukrainian government to investigate a political opponent constituted the solicitation of a campaign contribution from a foreign government.
However, it is important to note that most scholars agree that to be impeachable, an offence does not need to break the law. There only needs to be the political will.
Kerry's Legal Troubles: Breaking the Law?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Bypassing the lawful process
Trump's Ukraine call was impeachable because it was believed that he enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. This was seen as an abuse of power and an act of misconduct. Although it was not a campaign finance violation, it did bypass the lawful process.
Trump withheld money from Ukraine to solicit information that would benefit himself. This strengthens the argument of the abuse of power. While this wouldn't break campaign finance laws, it is still problematic because it bypasses the lawful process to deal with such situations. It's one thing to have an official investigation from the Justice Department, and another to go rogue and use private citizens.
Most scholars agree that to be impeachable, an offence does not need to break the law. There only needs to be the political will. That is, there only needs to be enough votes in the House to impeach, and then in the Senate to remove the president from office. While pretty much any action could be an impeachable offence if lawmakers agree that it falls under one of those categories, the Ukraine call is outstanding because of the clarity of both the evidence and the offence.
Andrew Johnson: Laws Broken and Their Consequences
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Ukraine call is impeachable because the House leadership believes it has enough evidence of wrongdoing to garner enough votes. However, most scholars agree that to be impeachable, an offence does not need to break the law.
The alleged offence is that Trump enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term.
Since the American government had voted to give the money to Ukraine, Trump withholding it to solicit information that would benefit himself strengthens the argument of the abuse of power, adding another layer of misconduct.
A Justice Department spokeswoman said the department's criminal division reviewed "the official record of the call" and determined there was no campaign finance violation.
