House Judiciary Committee Releases Report on Impeachment

Among many other things, it cites recent writings by VC bloggers Jonathan Adler, Keith Whittington and myself.


The House Judiciary Committee majority staff recently released its report in support of a second impeachment of Donald Trump. I may well have more to say about it later, when time allows.

For now, I will note that the report cites a variety of recent writings on impeachment by Volokh Conspiracy bloggers, including Jonathan Adler, Keith Whittington, and myself. The works cited include this one by Adler, Keith Whittington's  article in the Washington Post, and two of my blog posts (see here and here).

I should emphasize these quotes and citations are far from the most important aspect of the report. And I certainly don't claim that we were the ones who played the decisive role in persuading the House to proceed with impeachment. But it is nice to get noticed, and to play a part, even if only a very small one, in this historic occasion.

NEXT: SCOTUS Stays Injunction in FDA v. ACOG

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Yay! Ilya pleases himself again…

    1. That’s what matters

    2. Ilya, this increasingly convinces me that domestic harmony in this country would be improved by deporting you to wherever you are from.

      I don’t say that lightly — you are stirring up stuff that is best not stirred up, and if you want to talk “greater good” then the “greater good” would be in deporting you. Now as to civil rights, I don’t see you overly concerned about Trump’s, and hence why should we care about yours?

      1. Ilya, this increasingly convinces me that domestic harmony in this country would be improved by deporting you to wherever you are from.

        This is a new low, even for you.

        1. Did you bother to read the second sentence that qualifies the first?

          He’s going to get people killed and I am trying to emphasize that.

          1. So what you’re saying is, there are people out there who get violent when they hear things they disagree with and when things don’t go their way – you might call them “bullies” – and we should appease them by deporting the people they disagree with?

            1. We appease BLM, don’t we?

              1. You think they’ve gotten everything they want?

                  1. Yeah, they were hungry for symbolism.

          2. Nothing in the rest of your comment makes your initial statement any less despicable.

          3. The person who has already gotten people killed is Trump, and you and his other cultists cheered him on.

            1. The person who has already gotten people killed is Trump

              The BLM/antifa rioting…which was a direct result of the “mostly peaceful protesting” of the past year that you and most Democrats “cheered on”…has killed at least 25 people so far (including multiple cold-blooded assassinations, which included the murder of at least one cop), inflicted mass destruction and destroyed numerous people’s livelihoods.

              Try again.

              1. President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government.
                He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government.

                Not really something you can whattabout to some dodgy causality to Dems and the Floyd protests this summer.

              2. The murder rate overall shot up due to this mayhem as well. In 2016 the BLM guy sniped 9 police officers in Dallas. Entirely based on lies and fomented by media and Democrats.

            2. I haven’t been following this so I assume it’s just severe derangement hissy fit, episode #5,789.

              How did Trump get people killed? By encouraging them to peacefully protest?

              1. By encouraging them to storm the Capitol. Surely you didn’t miss all the news last week?

                1. Really?
                  When did this happen? It isn’t in the video or the transcript of the speech he gave.

                  Given the seriousness of this accusation, I am certain there are exact quotes and time/places available as evidence…

                  1. It absolutely is in the video and transcript of the speech he gave. Also in hundreds if not thousands of tweets over the past two months.

                    Someone stands outside a building and yells, “There’s a girl being raped in that building over there! The guy inside grabbed her and dragged her inside! He’s a pedophile who has done it before! Stop the rape!” and then the crowd of people listening breaks down the door and rushes inside. Hint: the speaker encouraged the crowd to do it, even though he never used the specific words, “Break down the door and rush inside!”

      2. I don’t understand this kind of bigoted commentary: are you going to deport all immigrants to their land of origin whenever they say stupid things?

      3. Let’s put it to a vote, shall we? Deport Dr Ed or Ilya?

        In case you haven’t noticed, the country is in the process of out-casting your cult right now. You are all pariahs. No one likes you. Really. The cult only has each other, and the cult is made up of people with crippling personality disorders, so you really don’t even like each other that much.

        I don’t think you’d like the outcome, Dr.

  2. “The House Judiciary Committee recently released its report”

    It looks like a staff report.

    Presumably, the committee majority will endorse the report, but that hasn’t happened yet.

  3. I’m deeply pleased that our nation’s representatives are spending time on what really matters. Vaccines, pandemics, China, energy, Ethiopia crisis, opioid crisis, student debt crisis, etc. Nah! We gotta impeach Trump because he said the word “fight.”

    1. Even better, this supposed life-or-death, gotta-shut-the-country-down pandemic will now have been bookended by two show impeachments, less than a year apart. It’s telling indeed where priorities lie.

    2. No we gotta impeach Trump because he incited an insurrection against the United States government and the legal installation of a new President, duly and fairly elected. If anyone does not think that is important he or she should go live in Cuba or Venezuela or Russia or a bunch of other places where that doesn’t matter.

      1. Insurrection my a** — although I fear you might well get the insurrection you so badly want. out of the 80 Million — maybe 100 Million — people who voted for him, might there be a dozen psychos?

        Stealing an election was one thing, but this is over the top.

        Kick a dog enough times and you will get bitten.

        1. Chicken Little lies and says what?

          Trump had 74,216,722 votes. Not 80 million, and certainly not 100 million.

          The sky will not fall, no matter how much you might hope for it to do so.

          1. “Trump had 74,216,722 votes”

            AFTER shredding….

            1. There was no shredding, you lying treasonweasel.

      2. Inciting an insurrection is a criminal act. If you think he did it, charge him, prosecute him, and put him in prison.

        If you can’t be bothered to prosecute someone when you accuse them of a crime, why should we take the accusation seriously?

        1. You think a criminal prosecution for criminal acts would be less divisive than an impeachment? Or do you think that impeachment is only possible for criminal acts?

          1. I think that Democrats are accusing Trump of a crime, and if you’re going to accuse somebody of a crime, you should have the courage of your convictions.

            If he’s prosecuted, he gets a trial with due process rights, presumption of innocence, discovery, cross examination of witnesses. BOTH sides of the argument get aired.

            Instead you’re proposing a political kangaroo court with none of that. I think it’s because you know that, if both sides get aired, your case for incitement falls apart.

            If you think I’m wrong about that, risk the trial.

          2. You think a criminal prosecution for criminal acts would be less divisive than an impeachment? Or do you think that impeachment is only possible for criminal acts?

            Another proud graduate of the Sarcastr0 School of Braindead Straw Man Argumentation.

        2. Brett – it’s 1.2 MILES down that street. The insurrection started *before* the people listening to Trump could walk there…

          1. I know, and the people who actually committed serious crimes, rather than walking into a building already thrown open, can be shown to have planned what they did in advance.

            The Democrats are claiming that the “incitement” was Trump contesting the election, not that speech.

            1. Brett, the incitement was both—the endlessly contested election, followed by multiple speeches, and not just from Trump, but also from people obviously working at Trump’s direction.

              Although, just in general, continuing to contest an election, and rabble rousing about it, after the election has been proved legitimate beyond doubt, is more than sufficient grounds for impeachment. There is much more than that in this case.

              As for the building, “already thrown open,” it was bashed open, or stormed by mobs attacking police defending entryways. Nobody went through that scene in innocence of what was going on. The evidence of violence was all around. You think folks go through doorways reeking of tear gas and don’t notice? They don’t notice the combat debris strewn everywhere?

              In previous comments, Brett, you have pretended that only a tiny number of rioters were actually violent. The only way you could be sincere about that is if there is some whitewash channel broadcasting fake news, and that’s all you watch. Maybe that is you.

              Instead, take a look at CNN. You will see at least hundreds of extremely violent attackers, coordinating tactics, and overwhelming with ease a considerable number of police officers (notably more police than you said the violent attackers numbered, but still far too few police given what they were up against). There were at least thousands of people concerting their own movements to back up the attackers at the actual points of contact.

              There is no point in lying about what happened at the Capitol. It’s all going to be dissected, and presented to the public in detail. When that happens, a lot of stuff will come out about how this was organized, and about which right wing politicians, and which law enforcement officials, were complicit. Stuff about the inadequate deployments and delayed responses will be gone over thoroughly.

              When you arrest some guy with Molotov cocktails, and you find contact info for Ted Cruz on him, that raises questions. It was stuff like that which traced Watergate back to Nixon. Let’s just wait and see, okay. And please stop lying and subject changing while we wait.

    3. Hey, stop typing comments 5 people will read and breathe some air or you’ll die!! Can’t do more than 1 thing at a time you know!

  4. A handful of Senators including Mitch have had enough and gone on record that Trump should be gone.

    This won’t be like it was a year ago. They could have avoided this by doing the right thing then but they were too terrified of the Trump mob that was on display last week.

    They are still terrified, but they realize that there is no appeasing this mob so they have nothing to gain by going along for another round.

    The Report is important because it spells out what we are doing and why we are doing it.

    Evidence? Doesn’t matter. Witnesses? Doesn’t matter. The Republicans proved that last year and they don’t care.

    Political will? That is all that matters. And it exists now.

    This can be done in a day.

    1. “This won’t be like it was a year ago.”

      Indeed, it’s right after an election, not right before, and they’ll think they have years in which their voters will become less angry at them. Their worst betrayals always come soon after elections.

      But if enough Republican members of Congress go along with this to convict, the GOP is dead to me, and I won’t be alone in that.

      1. Your cult is dead to the country. No one cares. No one cares about your feelings.

    2. You started your comment with a lie, and it went downhill from there. But at least you made it crystal clear that Democrats don’t care about facts, or law, or integrity. They only care about political power, and using it to punish their adversaries, who they see as enemies.

      1. You know who keeps talking about the other side as enemies? It’s not the Democrats.

  5. Ilya disgraces Scalia Skool of Law!!!

    1. Perhaps he is “too kool for skool”…?

  6. Ilya, you want a civil war?

    This is how you get a civil war.

    “Peaceful transition of power” goes both ways. Those in power have a duty to leave; those taking power have a duty to let those in power leave.

    But the left is already gleefully making it’s black lists.

    At least it is not proscription.


    1. We’re helping him leave, which is even better.

      Pro tip: next time, make the threats before you act on them.

      1. Have you seen the hysterical reports of a division-strength army attacking the Capitol? What price do you intend to pay???

    2. A question for those who bandy about civil war talk. The armed forces will be under new command on January 20. Who will raise, train, arm, command and pay an insurrectionary force? Please be specific.

      1. The 2A “well regulated militia”, of course. If not, then Heller was a wasted exercise.

      2. Heroin has been illegal for over 100 years. You’d think the armed forces could keep it out of the country, don’t you?

        1. It’s definitely possible there will be a few terrorist incidents; that threat is always greatest from the Right. It’s also possible they’ll be ugly, tragic and horrible, as was Oklahoma City.

          If that happens it will be interesting to watch certain commentators here try to disguise their pride. Sordid, disgusting, but interesting.

    3. As to “peaceful transition of power” — Obama never did it.

      1. You are a moron and a traitor, and no one will take anything you say seriously ever again.

    4. Threats of civil war is not an argument from a position of strength or principle.

      It’s the kind of argument people make who know they’ve got nothing substantive left, and are afraid.

      1. Threats of civil war is not an argument from a position of strength or principle.

        It’s the kind of argument people make who know they’ve got nothing substantive left, and are afraid.

        Once again we’re faced with the same old type of question about you: Are you too stupid to understand the difference between a “warning” about actions having a likely consequence and a “threat” of doing something, or are you just being your usual dishonest straw man-arguing self.”

        1. I know the difference between a threat and a warning, and would ask you to stop blowing smoke up my ass about it.

  7. You want to talk about insurrection and coup, the House just voted to tell Pence to remove Trump using a constitutional provision that was obviously not designed to remove a President merely because some people view him as unpopular.

    This is actual treason and sedition. Some cos play actors conducting a brief sit in of a building is far from what the Democrats actually just did. So you want your treason, there you have it. Probably time to clean up the mess soon enough.

    1. Your grasp of English is deteriorating by the day. Those words don’t mean what you clearly think they mean.

      1. Nancy Pelosi asked the military to conduct a military coup. You’re gaslighting is not going to work.

    2. Jimmy, I am increasingly terrified of what some unhinged individual(s) might do in response to this crap, and while the USSS (et al) are good, they aren’t perfect. They’re still human…

      I don’t want to speculate because I don’t want to give anyone any ideas but there are a lot of soft targets that I doubt could ever be (let alone actually are) properly protected.

      The Democrats are amongst pools of liquid gasoline and they’re lighting off bottle rockets. Any sane person would cringe….

      This isn’t going to end well…

      1. Yeah that is what I have been saying for almost a year now….No one listened….Oh well…popcorn time…

    3. Jimmy, even worse was Pelosi’s attempted coup — she demanded the nuke codes! Imagine the outcry if Newt Gingrich had done that…

      1. I think some people don’t understand this “nuke codes” business. It’s not like Trump can punch some codes into an app on his phone and launch the US nuclear arsenal by remote control.

  8. Dumbest move possible for the Dems. Left alone, Trump would be the GOP’s albatross while the dither and prevaricate over whether who if anyone will succeed Trump as party leader while he leaves them hanging and wondering if he will run again in four years

    Impeached and convicted and barred from running again, he becomes a martyr the right will not easily forget, while the GOP has free rein to spend four years picking a new front runner.

    No one ever accused politicians of looking farther ahead than the end of their nose.

    1. I fear the Dems are hoping for a terrorist attack that they can use for political hay.

      Concern about those injured & killed be damned because they are that ruthless.

      1. Pelosi is probably writing an a self-styled “Enabling Act” as we speak…

      2. What fools they are! Don’t they realize your guys can thwart them just by withholding the attack?

        1. “your guys can thwart them just by withholding the attack”

          Do you honestly think we can???

          The problem with not being fascists — like the left are — is that we think independently, and hence act independently.

    2. It’s a pretty dumb move for the reasons you cite, and others.

      But they spent 4 years telling their base that Trump was Literally Hitler, a shambling monster poorly disguised as a human being. How can they just let him go now, without looking really bad? You don’t just let Literally Hitler go, now, do you?

      They’re riding the tiger, they have no good options here.

      1. Brett Bellmore : “….. poorly disguised as a human being”

        Let me put it this way : I wouldn’t want to be the person tasked with assembling evidence of Donald Trump’s human-beingness. I can think of a more frustrating or difficult task.

        1. Let me put it this way : I wouldn’t want to be the person tasked with assembling evidence of Donald Trump’s human-beingness. I can think of a more frustrating or difficult task.

          Especially when you’re so stupid that you can’t differentiate between hyperbole and reality.

          1. Well somebody can’t, that’s fer sure……

    3. “Impeached and convicted and barred from running again, he becomes a martyr the right will not easily forget, while the GOP has free rein to spend four years picking a new front runner.”

      It’s not even this, Trump is a fighter and barred from running again, with nothing to lose, he’d be a truly loose cannon.

      1. I just wish he’d started a declassification frenzy the day after the election, instead of thinking it was still possible to win with the fix in that way.

        At this point he can’t really do anything, the bureaucracy have already started taking their orders from the new administration. Illegally so, of course, but nothing new about that.

      2. Trump is about as opposite from a fighter as can be. He is a coward. A thing-he-likes-to-grab. A whiner. A sore loser. Not a fighter. Like all cowards, he’s perfectly happy to let others fight for him, but he isn’t one.

        For some inexplicable reason, Trumpkins confuse being nasty and rude, being shameless and unwilling to apologize, with “fighting.”

  9. One more time.

    Does anyone really think Trump will be convicted? I doubt Joe Manchin will vote for impeachment which means the dems need 18 pubs to convict. I would like for Ilya or anyone else to name the pubs they think will defect.

    1. Until the Georgia elections are certified and the new Senators are sworn in, possibly as late as the 22nd, the Republicans have a 51/48 majority in the Senate. It will require 19 Republicans to vote to convict (48+19=67) although I’m not clear on how the currently vacant seat counts.

      1. 2/3 of the members present required for conviction so vacant seats don’t count. Don’t know what would constitute a quorum for the purpose.

        1. 51 actual members. So, in theory, they could impeach on a party line vote of 34 Democrats, as long as McConnell was willing to cut his own throat politically by helping them assemble a rigged quorum.

          More likely a few Republican Senators who despise Trump but don’t dare vote to convict would find some pretext to be out of the chamber, and allow them to impeach with fewer than 19 Republicans.

    2. I saw Manchin on CNN tonight, and he sure sounded like he was prepared to vote for impeachment.

      I think Trumpkins underestimate how many members of Congress — Republicans included — are unhappy with lynch mobs being sent their way by Donald Trump, who then repeatedly refused to assist members of Congress and then told the mobs how much he loved them. All in service of fraudulent claims of a stolen election.

      1. Nieporent, I saw Manchin too. Came to the same conclusion you did, but I do think he would need to see imposing evidence first.

      2. with lynch mobs being sent their way

        “Hand up! Don’t shoot!”

  10. Kudos to the three of you. We have read those pieces and they reflect the quality, integrity and intelligence of the authors who wrote them.

  11. I’m so sick of your self-satisfying bullshit that I could puke.

  12. For those of you who claim that this impeachment is not divisive to the country and couldn’t possibly end up in a civil war, please just reread all the comments on this blog.

    1. Appeasing Internet tough guys is not how you get unity.

      1. So we should instead be in the business of appeasing liberal blowhards that feign offense at a simple sit in that if it were the BLM crowd would be getting universal praise right now in the media…?

        1. No, we should be in the business of holding the President of the United States accountable for his actions when he spends two months telling people lies and whipping them into a frenzy in an attempt to get them to somehow cause Congress to overturn an election that he lost.

          And I don’t recall seeing a lot of cops getting beaten to death, or kicked and clubbed with a pole flying an American flag while people around him chant “USA! USA! USA!”, at simple sit ins.

          1. Oh OK well no that we are holding people accountable for whipping people into frenzies and such, I’ve got this long line of liberal politicians that enabled violence, looting, and destruction of property all summer long by throwing gas on the race fire. So when do we get to the part where equal justice is dispensed now that this is suddenly a concern and all?

            1. What “threw gas on the race fire” was Black people getting killed by the police without meaningful repercussions – and then protests against police brutality being met with rubber bullets, tear gas and arbitrary beatings, often being broadcast live.

              1. What threw gas on the fire was BLM lying about things like Michael Brown having his hands up when he was shot, with the glad assistance of the media.

                They could have focused on the rare cases where somebody was genuinely innocent, but they deliberately picked poster boys who were provably guilty, because they didn’t want to bring people together and solve problems, they wanted to foment hate.

          2. Maybe you missed all the mostly peaceful protests over the summer and fall which coincided with burning, looting, and murdering; or the government-sponsored autonomous zones which resulted in burning, looting, and murdering.

            1. Don’t forget the raping…

          3. And also no one at the capitol hill event was trying to do anything like overturn the election. They were advocating for transparency in how the vote was counted and protesting the censorship of their cause. There was absolutely no attempt to overthrow the government or even stop the electoral college vote count beyond the scope of civil disobedience.

            Stop trying to make this something it was simply NOT. You aren’t doing your side any favors by perpetuating the lies.

            1. You mean, no one other than Donald Trump? And the people who were interviewed at “the capitol hill event” who said they were there to make sure that Donald Trump was named the next president?

              1. So if that really happened, basically the corollary to “Obama gonna pay my MORTGAGE!!!1!” (which actually did happen).

            2. Jimmy, a lot of folks at the Capitol wanted to hang Pence. Maybe that shouldn’t be taken seriously—just a chant. But once they smash their way in, and put a bunch of cops in the hospital, and kill one of them, would you be surprised if cautious listeners decided to take them at their word?

              1. As opposed to the thugs running CHOP/CHAZ?

              2. A lot of rioters over the summer apparently want to rape the police, and to terrorize everyone until their idea of justice happens. Maybe that shouldn’t be taken literally, but after one of them shot five police in a previous ambush, shouldn’t cautious listeners be concerned?

                1. rape the police


              3. Alas, we just endured a summer of speakers saying “a dead cop is a good cop” and making similar statements. Funny how we were not supposed to take them seriously…

                1. If you can find any office holders who said “a dead cop is a good cop,” please point them out, and I’ll happily join the bandwagon for their impeachment.

      2. +1, Sarcastr0.

    2. Right wing commenters on this site are threatening violence and civil war. Again. Just like pretty much every other day. So what?

      1. Why is the left all of the sudden “rally around the flag” when we just got done with a summer full of hearing about how this country is just a racist hell hole, perpetuated by white racism, and has it prosperity due to the ill begotten gains of slavery…?

        1. You confuse blind devotion with love of country.

          Open-eyed understanding of needed reform and belief it can happen is true love of country.

          I cannot say the same for those who keep talking about how America is over and getting excited about the coming bloodshed.

      2. Right wing commenters on this site are threatening violence and civil war.


    3. The 101st fighting keyboards division?

      1. Respect inclines use of the proper name of a group as formidable and accomplished as The 101st Chairborne Keyboarders Division.

  13. Lawyer collaborators with the anti-populist deep state. Crush the US pro-democracy movement, as their sponsors in the Chinese Communist Party do in Hong Kong. Not surprised.

  14. The tech billionaires who own the media and the Democrat Party will do even better than their $trillion extra enrichment, the biggest fraud haul in history. The rest of us will suffer.

  15. The contrapositive of a true assertion is true. (If A then B is true. Not B then not A must be true. All bats are mammals. This animal is not a mammal. It cannot be a bat.)

    Legal liability is a replacement for endless cycles of violent retaliation, making life unlivable. When there is no legal recourse, violence is justified, perhaps mandatory.

    This is retrospective analysis, but cannot be ignored today. German law said, one cannot confine people not convicted of a crime. Non-convicted Jews were confined in Germany. They had every justification for violence. The most effective would have been to eradicate, not Nazi figureheads, but the 20 families of oligarchs whom the Nazi Party represented.

    Today, the real enemies are the tech billionaires, owners of the media and of the Democrat Party. Their sponsor is the even wealthier Chinese Communist Party. These are hundreds of enemies. Leave the billions of people who have done nothing wrong alone.

    The lawyer has no understanding of this logic. The lawyer is enforcer for these enemies of our nation. We will have to crush this toxic profession to reach them. They are more toxic than organized crime.

    1. Get. Psychiatric. Help.

        1. Having read these comments, Help. Us. All.

      1. Try to be more lawyerly. You sound frustrated and stupid, with your KGB talking point.

        1. To be fair, I am frustrated, that a mentally ill person such as yourself keeps polluting these discussions with your delusional obsessions.

  16. Comments have managed to less substantive here over time.

    It’s now just threats.

    This is how the own the libs unprincipled faction of the GOP ends. Not with a bang, but angry impotent tears.

    1. They also offer tu quoque’s and red herrings in addition to threats.

      Without logical fallacies or violent fantasies, they’d have nothing at all to to talk about.

      Meanwhile the country is finally mostly united behind an opinion – 52% of US adults say Donald Trump needs to be removed from power. Social media companies, banks, etc. are all dropping traitorous “stop the steal” politicians as customers and recipients of donations. The Joint Chiefs put out the only political statement in our lifetimes that the capitol riot was unlawful and an attack on the constitution. Fucking Mitch McConnell supports impeachment.

      It’s over. They are pariahs. We won’t need to wait 50 years for the history books to call them what they are: a failed fascist treason cult.

    2. Comments have managed to less substantive here over time.

      It’s now just threats.

      Don’t sell your straw man clap-trap short.

  17. And I thought Trump was a megalomaniacal, self-promoting twat . . .

  18. VC bloggers support the mob, and the mob returns the favor. Intense in the moment. Scary for the future.

  19. Is it often that photos of an “insurrection” are indistinguishable from tourists taking a guided tour of government buildings?

    The Kavanaugh protests seem closer.

    1. How many dead Capitol police are we up to now, ML? Your out of context pic can’t really hide from the actual facts.

      1. One.

        Trying to count a guy that committed suicide a day later as a fatality of this riot is…
        …well, actually, typically dishonest of you.

Please to post comments