Trump Impeachment Articles Could Include His Slurring of Elizabeth Warren As 'Pocahontas'

[DonViejo]

BY JASON LE MIERE ON 11/28/17 AT 4:59 PM

President Donald Trump not only provoked outrage in referring to Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas” at an event honoring Navajo veterans at the White House Monday. He may have further helped build the case for his impeachment: Abuse of Congress once formed part of the case to remove a president.

One of the articles of impeachment against Andrew Johnson, one of only two presidents to be impeached, accused him of using “intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues…and loud threats and bitter menaces…against Congress.”

Trump was swiftly condemned by Warren for using what she described as a “racial slur.” Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez described the term similarly. The White House, however, denied it was a racial slur and instead doubled down on the attack on Warren, claiming that she had lied about her Native American heritage to advance her career, something that Warren has denied.

Trump’s comment does not rise to the level of the accusations against Johnson, a Democrat thrust into battle with a Republican-controlled Congress following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. While it would not be enough on its own to qualify as a case for impeachment, said Allan Lichtman, a political historian at American University, it could bolster the case against Trump.

more
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-impeachment-articles-warren-pocahontas-725056

[Chemisse]

1. He's gone off on others in Congress.

This could add to a pile of evidence on that clause.

[ginnyinWI]

2. hoisted on his own...maybe someday. n/t

[onenote]

3. it wouldn't bolster the case

it probably wouldn't even get a majority of Democrats. If an effort to impeach the president is going to be undertaken in the 21st century, it isn't going to be based on 19th century norms of decorum.

[DonViejo]

5. In case you missed it..

the fourth paragraph of the OP:

Trump’s comment does not rise to the level of the accusations against Johnson, a Democrat thrust into battle with a Republican-controlled Congress following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. While it would not be enough on its own to qualify as a case for impeachment, said Allan Lichtman, a political historian at American University, it could bolster the case against Trump

.

[mythology]

6. That's kind of like saying they can add that he uses his finger to scoop up dip instead of a spoon

It is obnoxious, stupid and petty, but it's not adding anything meaningful to the list of reasons Trump is a disgrace.

[onenote]

7. I obviously didn't miss it. The author says it would bolster the case. That's absurd

And the author of the article quoted in the OP intentionally seeks to mislead by stating that Johnson avoided impeachment by only one vote. What he must know, but doesn't want you to know because it doesn't support his narrative, is that the article based on Johnson's intemperate speech was considered such a drop dead loser in the Senate, that the managers of the impeachment process in the Senate didn't attempt to present it at the trial or have a vote taken on it by the Senate.

[Irish_Dem]

4. Will issuing duels be next?? nt

[malaise]

8. Simple question

Name something about which Groper Don the Con did not lie?