Destituer Trump: le remède pire que le mal?

En toute modestie, je ne partage pas la "chute" du texte de Jonathan Turley sur la question. L'auteur, qui enseigne le droit à George Washington University, croit que ce qu'on avance actuellement comme accusations pourrait nuire grandement à la présidence dans l'avenir. S'il est vrai qu'on avance actuellement des arguments qui présentent certaines failles (rien ne dit que les enquêtes en cours ne révéleront pas autre chose...), je crois pour ma part que Donald Trump affaiblit déjà sévèrement la fonction. Que pourra-t-on reprocher à un autre président si on tolère ses propos?

 "This can seem weirdly incongruous, given the other presidential impeachment in our history: Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about something relatively trivial; many view Trump as opposing fundamental American values. But Clinton deserved impeachment because he lied under oath. I was one of the experts who testified before Congress during Clinton’s impeachment hearings and, despite voting for Clinton, I maintained that perjury clearly fell within the standard regardless of the subject. Presidents don’t get to lie under oath any more than Congress gets to choose impeachment standards depending on the president. While this may be frustrating and inconvenient, there is no proof Trump has committed any crime or otherwise impeachable offense.

Impeaching a president on the grounds of high contempt or misbehaviors would leave the presidency weakened. Trump won’t be our last president and we shouldn’t count on making the presidency great again if we add a no confidence option to impeachment."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/08/24/whats-worse-than-leaving-trump-in-office-impeaching-him/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-posteverything%3Ahomepage%2Fcard&utm_term=.9724c8b41ba4