The Constitution allows for speech that makes conspiracy-mongering legal, but we must demand more from our presidents than minimal compliance with the law. I wrote why Trump deserved his impeachment, today at The Federalist.
The Constitution allows for speech that makes conspiracy-mongering legal, but we must demand more from our presidents than minimal compliance with the law. I wrote why Trump deserved his impeachment, today at The Federalist.
So you want to punish President Trump for lying without ever hearing the evidence of election fraud. Sounds like the well reasoned position of your average Trump hater. With no consideration of the evidence , the 2nd impeachment is as bogus as the first.
Good luck with that one. I think the readers of The Federalist deserve better.
The readers of The Federalist deserve a posting board as they were promised when theirs was taken down so that we don’t end up on this non-read board. You nailed the Trump hater part. I’m eighty four, read Buckley before there was a NR it has been funny (well maybe not ha ha funny) to watch the “rather be wrong than win” people take over the party
Strange thoughts from a website I visit daily. If I see possible evidence and investigation was blocked how could one conclude that your narrative is valid.
This is just one example of the stolen election—
https://amgreatness.com/2021/01/24/zuckerbergs-safe-election-con/ .
So Trump should be impeached? Really? Was he supposed to be silent about all the election fraud? I’m guessing he spoke up because the media refused to investigate and report it along with his own party. Gee, what do you think
will be the result of future elections? Do you think anything will be done to ensure legitimate elections? Voter ID?
And what gross conduct did Trump commit? And we have been betrayed? Because of his ego? No one has done more for the “workers”:of the country than him. Trump has been thwarted at every turn by the Deep State, the Swamp, Big Tech, mention the Republicans.
Had to respond to your infuriating article. It makes no sense.
SO RIGHT!
Cheryl Warren nailed it.
Your article is incredibly disappointing from the high standard I’ve come to expect of the Federalist. You simply throw away any serious conversation about mass election fraud. Of which there are literally hundreds of signed affadavits from witnesses who could be prosecuted for perjury if they lied. Not to mention numerous statistical analyses showing that it is impossible, statistically, for Biden to have gotten 80M votes. Not to mention numerous historical, precedent breaking, concerns (see number of counties Trump won vs Biden won, bellweather counties that have predicted election for decades, and Trump being first incumbent President to have ever gotten more votes than his first election and yet still lost).
You are dishonest at the very best and a establishment, globalist, RINO liar at the worst. You look like yet another example of controlled opposition. There are only two or three reasons why a journalist, who makes a living from being informed, would have ignored all of the absolutely legitimate concerns about election fraud from the 2020 election. Ignorance and massive incompetence on your part are not convincing rationale. The only remaining probabilities is that you are brainwashed by group think among media establishment OR you are simply pretending to be a conservative — ergo you are controlled opposition.
I will pray for you to repent of your sins and amend your life. However, i do hope the federalist does not continue to avail itself of your services. What you have written is not journalism but flat out lies, deflection, false framing, and party-line establishment group think.
Thank you Athair . I loved your response and many of the others that responded to this article. The evidence presented was overwhelming there was election fraud. Who is this author think he is to say there wasn’t fraud. Close to 1,000 affadavits say otherwise. Anyone in their right mind who watched the video of ballots being pulled out from under a table in the middle of the night and being counted over and over can’t deny that was illegal. Why were observers kicked out of poll centers and cardboard put up on windows so no one could see? On and on the questions are asked but never answered. Just the opposite. You can face god knows what to just bring up the concept of election fraud. It feels like we are living in some bizarro world and then morons like this writer come out with an article like this that asks us to question ourselves and the massive amount of evidence that no court had the gonads to hear. So my point to this author is to say go screw yourself. I know what happened here as do most people with the ability to think.
The two responses I just read on your site mirror my feelings on the subject as well. There was considerable fraud committed in the past election for President, and only an extremely biased person would conclude otherwise. No matter how much the political party in power and their sycophants state otherwise, they will never submit to a true forensic analysis of the election. And Trump is supposed to just let this go? Yes, it is more than regrettable what happened, but since you blame him for what happened there, what about the blame and who should wear it for this past summer and fall? The country is in a pickle now. And the spectacle of a bogus impeachment (again, and worse, he’s no longer President) is more than absurd.
Hmmmm, should I believe all the judges, many of whom were appointed by Trump, who have dismissed all this evidence as utterly worthless, or should I believe a bunch of randos on a message board? This is difficult. I’m going to need to reconsider everything based on this small group of angry weirdos.
Uhh….and thats 80 million angry “weirdos”….Stephen.
I might consider this argument persuasive if it was not the case that many judges and juries have sentenced an innocent man to die. Judges are human, too, they make mistakes inlcuding the mistakes made following the election, and many do not have the courage to speak truth to power.
I spent 40+ years in court and it is not a perfect place. But what degrades Mr. Miller’s argument entirely are the insults hurled at those who disagree with him.
None of the cases were dismissed based upon the merits but rather on procedural grounds.
lets see do those judges see any political, social or career gain by not tossing them. Were they going to be the one being called crazy and threatened with impeachment? what does a single judge gain by continuing a case no matter how strong? why can we thr people not see what they saw? why ard cases sealed etc.
you are a moron if you think judges dont weigh politics. Hence John Roberts.
Dear Helen Keller,
I agree with all 4 comments above. Your article displays a glaring lack of knowledge of the evidence that has been presented: The massive lead he enjoyed until the counting suddenly stopped in 4 states for a variety of weak reasons. The hundreds if not thousands of eye witness accounts of poll watchers, USPS drivers and every other “lookey lew” with an iphone. The absolute lies that Dominion reps cited: the machines arent connected to the internet but were so connected in fact, we could track their digital breadcrumbs to several other countries the night of November 3. The forensics behind the pristine ballots that were fed into the machines….2…3…4….5 times perhaps. The pristine mail in ballots that were never folded and were pre-filled in by a printer…the evidence goes on and on dude. Youre either complicit and trying to weasel your way into some leftwing toilet paper media outlet or your just biased…either way your just wrong. The election was stolen and Trump warned us about it for months before the election. He knew it was coming but wasnt prepared for the entire federal government to turn their backs and promptly take a collective shit on the Constitution and the American people with such unity and resolve. No Helen….you also fail to realize the violence was caused by pro-fa and the black fisters posing as Trump supporters who were bussed in, escorted in (and more than likely organized by that saggy titted old fart pelosi) and the out of control capitol police person who shit their pants at the sight of a 110lb woman climbing through a portico.
YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE!!!!
AT LEAST NONE THAT WOULD CONVINCE A TRUMP HATER!
I get you would like to see Trump impeached, but you are making a new basis to do so. Congress only sent the article for incitement over, which is pretty conflicted and unproveable. Why didn’t the House write the one you wanted? It may have been more successful and it would have changed the tenor of electoral politics for generations. Instead, he should not be impeached because of the charges that were actually filed. Stop the wishcasting and deal with the result of the current process, which is a flaming pile of hot garbage.
This is a repeat of the first impeachment. Oversell the charges and the number of articles. Pare it back to meet your actual evidence, while still stretching it. Then try to prove it in the Senate without doing the work. It makes me wonder more about them. How does their process and thought-process work? Are they this stupid or is there something more cunning going on. Regardless, I don’t think I would be pleased to find out. GIGO.
What!?! Read Peter Navarro’s 3 comprehensive reports on election fraud. This election was stolen from Trump by a huge margin! 80 million people didn’t vote for this senile man. And he is ruining our nation in a matter of weeks! Look at the reports!!!! The Federalist usually gets it right……not this time!!!!!
So, Kyle. Bottom line, you believe Trump should have kept his peace and let the obvious fraud go unchallenged. We came to expect more of him than that and most of us believed he would get his day in court. He didn’t and, perhaps, didn’t conduct himself in a manner you felt was presidential. On the other hand, when in our history has such an outrageous fraud been perpetrated on the American people. We ALL know it. Even those who deny it saw it coming.
So an “impeachment” that was rushed through without any type of due process, without allowing Trump to defend himself is somehow legitimate? And you are a lawyer???
And now Chief Justice John Roberts will not preside at the Senate trial which leaves Trump without a neutral party to preside at this charade.
When Trump was running against Hillary I commented to one of my daughters that maybe Trump would win then be impeached and removed from office so a cooler head could become president. Well, he won, but the only offenses he has committed has been constitutionally protected speech. Some of it has been grating to be sure but so have the efforts to remove him from office using bad actors in the different branches of government.
The only reason to try to impeach and convict Trump now is fear. Fear that he will run again for president in 2024 and win. Fear and vindictiveness are not legitimate reasons to impeach. Fear that there will not be enough people that will agree with you and vote him in again. Fear that four years of Biden will be so disastrous that Trump will be a shoe in.
Glenn
I read your piece with surprise, but managed to finish it. To most fair-minded people, there was obvious and multiple examples of obvious and open fraud committed during this election cycle. These reported examples are dismissed, out of hand, by you, and others because they have been pronounced as unproven by judges of both political persuations. This judgement, in the absence of any meaningful examination of the facts surrounding it, is what you call dispositive? If anything I would submit that the rush to judgement by the judges in this case reflects poorly on our entire system of jurisprudence. Shame on you as a lawyer for going along with this farce.
I find myself in agreement with the other commenter’s position on wishing that several of the many court cases would have allowed discovery or at least a presentation of evidence in a trial instead of most being dismissed out of hand on procedure or lack of a particular standing. Much of the concrete evidence is not available to examine by anyone without FOIA requests or going to state legislatures to get them (many were out of session by law) to force the release of data that could become evidence. When court cases take months or years to build prior to a trial, trying to accomplish this in less than 90 days ends up being unfairly judged as “baseless”, thus an unrealistic rush to dismiss the possibilities.
I am more concerned with your closing statements, however. I do not agree that we should emulate leftists in what we desire, but the rules of the game have changed. It is as if you expect Republicans to win a game of football using the rules and methods of the Knute Rockne era instead of those of the Bill Belichick era. I have fairly high standards, and it pains me, but I will not see my children’s right to an America with personal freedom and liberty lost because I am unwilling to go to a figurative war and use all means at my disposal to vanquish the enemies of America. The days of standing on the moral high ground and watching it be washed away into pebbles by the rushing river of leftism and Marxism are foolish daydreaming and a futile argument at this juncture.
Just answer me one question – are you a never trumper – that would explain your crooked reasoning in this article. I’m sick of these holier than thou “conservatives” who preach about constitutionalism – the parts they like only
All you had to do is insert the word “censure” and perhaps you have a point.
Perhaps you look at the aftermath of all this and see mentions of “re-education,” “banning,” etc. that the leftist media, celebrity-class and politicians are spewing and you’ll see why half of the country feels threatened.
There is solid evidence that the Capitol riot was pre-planned. It was awful, but certainly not to the degree of Portland, Minneapolis, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Kenosha, etc. were. Where is the accountability there? Was their frustration valid, but not the DC rioters?
Why is storming the Capitol building more egregious than looting and burning down someone’s livelihood? Are our elected Congressmen, Senators and the building they occupy more valuable than a Walmart, Target or Burger King?
I don’t know where you came up with this crap, but you are dead wrong!
Vincent well said I could not do it any better!
Dear Mr. Sammin, I was surprised and pleased to see this piece in The Federalist. Kudos to Ben Domenech for publishing a piece that offers another view on this contentious issue. I sincerely appreciate your informed and impassioned writing in defense of our constitution and the recognition that we need leaders with integrity.
Thank you!
Mr. Sammin, please notice what your subtitle said in your article on the Federalist:
“The Constitution allows for speech that makes conspiracy-mongering legal, but we must demand more from our presidents than minimal compliance with the law.”
Let’s hone in on that phrase: “minimal compliance with law.”
So you admitted the President complied with the law, but you seem to be unaware of the fact Impeachment is a legal process, so sacred that the Chief Justice is required to preside when the President is on trial, and every single Senator is put under oath or affirmation. The Senate is not supposed to function as a political body in this moment, but as a courtroom.
To impeach President Trump when he did not violate the law is a gross overreach which opens a can of worms you cannot close. What happens when the other side, which views racism as anything we can perceive, decides to Impeach for a “moral failure” with no legal grounding?
Do not allow anger at a failure of the President blind you to the specific legal requirements of the Constitution and the deep, long-stretching consequences such a departure from that document would set.
This screed belongs on Vox, The Nation, Mother Jones, Slate, or some leftist blog, not The Federalist. Mr Sammin does not belong on the masthead as a contributor. We as readers deserve better.
I’m sorry you had to read something you disagree with.
Oh, that’s petty of you. I read all kind of things that I disagree with. It’s how I have learned to parse information and detect deceit. I can tell when someone is living in a bubble by what they write, and you are suffocating in such a bubble. You really appear to be basing your beliefs on the pathetic MSNBC or CNN crew, as well as those other blind, deaf, and dumb outlets I mentioned. You really are just getting the feedback you deserve.
Mr. Sammin: The evidence of voter fraud and a stolen election is, to put it mildly, overwhelming. State legislatures circumvented by governors, secretaries of state and election boards; massive ballot dumps for Biden in the middle of the night after voting was stopped for no “apparent” reason; ballots counted multiple times (see Georgia); voter tabulating software connected to the internet; judges alleging no standing or the equivalent, refusing thereby to allow evidence to be examined; all committed with the help of a supine to rabid press and speech-crushing big tech punks with way too much power. I don’t understand why the Federalist thought it appropriate for its readers to have to listen to another voice like yours spouting the same garbage we must listen to day in and day out, that is if there are any of us left who look to the major news sources for a shred of truth. You would do much better to see this election for what it was: a power grab plain and simple by a conniving democrat party intent on silencing half of the country out of pure fear of an electorate awakened by the most impressive president of my 78-year lifetime.
Looks like TDS is starting to infect The Federalist. Quick someone call Mollie Hemingway and have her do an exorcism before it’s too late!
I agree with all the above comments calling you out for being wrong on this issue.
Your article and opinion just proves that LAWYERS, and especially ones with website forums, think of themselves as the arbiters of what’s fair in their own legal playground. The problem with the lawyer types like Kyle is they have such a sense of self importance they lose sight of how biased the system is to lying. In a field where lying and obfuscating the truth is an art form, is it any wonder why most people HATE lawyers… especially the smug ones.
In short, what a load of crap. Is your thong too tight?
I think the first few days of the Biden “Presidency” tell us a lot about the fraud and conspiracy of the last “election”. The dems were extremely fearful of another 4 years of Trump, he had eliminated a tremendous amount of fraud and hatred in his severely embattled term, this was enough to send an alarm and panic those who depend on government largesse for a luxurious living. Knowing a legal election would return him to power, all the fury and illegality available was thrown at him. If that was not enough they now try to banish him from running again, I think that says it all.
I couldn’t believe I was reading on the Federalist site. Was someone out sick? Trump and the 74 million voters that voted for him only want election integrity. The facts in those 5 or 6 swing states where anomalies weren’t explained are just supposed to be forgotten about and ignored as conspiracy. Nope, not going to happen.
I commented yesterday, but for some reason you have not posted it. Why?
You hurt Kyle’s feelings is my guess. If they are using a filter-bot, you might have used a word or combination of words that alerted the editorial Stasi.
What does “awaiting moderation” mean?
Are you really as stupid as you write? You have to be intellectually dishonest, or outright kiss-ass moron scared of demoncrats to write what you wrote. Are they doxxing you?
Thanks for reading.
You attack President Trump for making a “reckless” comment on a stolen Election??
That seems to a very poorly reasoned attack. There were legitimate, legal questions on numerous problems with the election.
You seem to think the President should simply accept these anomalies and not question the largest most important election in our history.
You have lost legitimacy to have any credibility
You’re a fool. Young, AND stupid. Typical combination.
Why? Because what the President spoke was the truth. Facts are a bitch.
Just because you don’t like it, tough. Put some evidence in your whine. Oh, wait, you can’t.
Grow a pair, kid, and quit being a tool.
Ummmm ……. 200,000 more votes in PA than registered voters? Some guy testified in Rome Italy a couple weeks ago that HE actually assisted Dominion in hacking/stealing the election? State courts are now ruling that changes to state election law without first going through the legislature are invalid? I THINK IT’S REAL CLEAR WHERE YOU STAND, SIR. Trump had EVERY right to contest the election results – and the courts SHOULD have heard the cases. Alas, you got your way, Trump-hater – and it will manifest itself in higher individual income taxes for all and lost jobs to foreigners, among other things. If this is what establishment Republicans have to offer, we don’t want ANY of it.
There were 6,915,283 votes for president in Pennsylvania (https://www.electionreturns.pa.gov/). There were 8,906,295 registered voters in Pennsylvania (https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/VotingElectionStatistics/Documents/currentvotestats.xls). This is one of the lies the President spread that now many people believe. It was never true.
I’ve seen proof of evidence. I haven’t seen any proof of those instances weren’t. But a theory is not but appears to be a true conspiracy. I’ve always poked fun of conspiracy theorists before. I now question my previous perceptions of those. The more I’m told I’m wrong gives me more validity to the election being stolen. Prove it wasn’t. Why are the media companies not even looking into our election???? Bingo right there. Real journalists would of…..
By the way, I’m a moderate independent and use to hate Trump vehemently. Undoubtedly proved of an established deep state. He proved the everyday workers meant nothing to the elitist politicians. It’s not about Republicans and Democrats. To be president apparently the elites are primary.
Did the author call for impeachment when Democrats protested electors?
From your article at The Federalist:
Trump has committed no crime, but his actions are a breach of the people’s trust Hamilton and the Founders believed was a sacred, special thing. Those conservatives who trusted him in the first place should be the most interested in righting the moral wrong.
So now our personal angst regarding morality is what dictates impeachment? I personally know of a person stationed in Korea that was running around with an absentee ballot that she was going to “fax” to her parents to drop in the ballot box in Georgia the day before the election.. No “wet” signature and no “chain of custody.” I am an Information System Security Officer and I understand that in order to have a chance in court, evidence must have a chain of custody. Yet we have judges changing election laws and invalidating the need for validating signatures and you call Trump immoral.
What do you really do as a lawyer, run those commercials that encourage people to call 1-800-CALL-KYLE if they had a slip and fall? Al Gore had two shots at the Supreme Court for hanging chads and “misleading ballot layout” and Trump got ZERO.
Sometimes I spend an inordinate amount of time sorting through houselold waste to assure that the garbage is separated from the recycling. In the end it always occurs to me that it is all rubbish. Both containers look the same but in the end still rubbish. Nice attempt Kyle, but still rubbish.
Yes, impeach Trump because Federal Politicians and lawyers from PA should decide who can run for the highest office- not ‘we the people’. Mr Lawyer (from PA of all places), I have a question; were the election law modifications specific to mail in ballots constitutional? Is PA election law not the proper jurisdiction of the PA legislature- as opposed to the executive branch?
Disappointing to see federalist going the route of touchy, feely, Never Trump fake news. Everyone entitled to an opinion, but the fake news aspect is the author conveniently ignores the fact that changes that were made by the PA executive branch were not constitutional- and those changes very obviously benefited their party.
The election was not fair. Were the changes enough to swing the result? We’ll never know thanks to people like the author. He doesn’t want to know. He hates Trump and does not wish for the people to decide who is worthy of running for the highest office. typical lawyer… I really feel for the folks in PA that work in the gas industry. We have far, far too many lawyers in this country.
Never Trumper
You keep popping up on the Federalist and I’ll quit them cold turkey like I did Fox News on election night. Quit with all the mind numbing politicking and start having the “let’s split the country” discussion before the 2nd Uncivil War starts. The gap is too big, it’s a bridge too far. Leftist Communist can occupy their half and patriot Americans will thrive in the other half. Begin this discussion amongst your peeps and encourage them to clear this topic far and wide.
Who are you and WHEREVER you came from I will buy you a ticket back. NOW.
You sir, are a nincompoop based on your article. The Democrats have rendered impeachment a meaningless political exercise and you apparently agree with them. This was not the intent of our Founders. See Federalist no. 65 (coincidentally the name of your publication which might want to rethink your positions in this article).
I quote Federalist 65 twice in the article.
See my comment below…
Publius in Federalist 65 seems to think impeachment should be for an actual crime when he reasons that the Supreme Court would not be suitable for it. He states “after having been sentenced to perpetual ostracism from the esteem and confidence, and honors and emoluments of his country, he will still be liable to prosecution and punishments in the ordinary course of law “ and that he could conceivably then be tried by the same body twice which he reasons is not acceptable.
Yet you say in your article the questions the Senators should ask themselves are “was this right? Was it good? Is this the way a president should act?” There seems to be a disagreement between Publius in Federalist 65 and yourself sir.
What say you?