By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In an era of significant national and international challenges, this publication is committed to rigorous scrutiny of those wielding power. From immigration policy and government expenditures to the suppression of dissent, a core mission involves holding leaders accountable. Membership is instrumental in enabling the continuation of these difficult investigations and the pursuit of truth.
Read the original article here
Reports suggest that former President Trump and his allies are quietly working to find a way to expunge his two impeachments from the record. This endeavor, seemingly driven by a desire to reshape his historical legacy, appears to be facing significant hurdles, as many view such an attempt as an effort to rewrite history rather than genuinely alter it. The core of the issue lies in the fundamental nature of impeachment itself – it’s a formal accusation and trial, a historical event, not a legal conviction that can be expunged like a minor offense.
The rationale behind Trump’s two impeachments is often revisited, with many pointing to the substantial evidence and witness testimonies presented during both proceedings. The first impeachment, stemming from the Ukraine scandal, involved allegations that Trump leveraged military aid to pressure Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden. Despite claims of a “perfect phone call,” evidence suggested a quid pro quo involving crucial aid, including weapons and financial support, which was vital for Ukraine’s defense against Russian advances. The involvement of figures like Rudy Giuliani in seeking dirt on Biden further complicated this narrative.
Moving to the second impeachment, the events of January 6th, 2021, remain a focal point. Investigations into this period revealed allegations of Trump conspiring to overturn the election, attempting to install loyalists in key positions, pressuring state officials, and orchestrating fake elector schemes. His alleged attempts to intimidate Vice President Mike Pence into rejecting certified electoral votes are also frequently cited. The Jan 6th committee’s findings painted a picture of concerted efforts to subvert democratic processes, actions that many argue were directly incited by Trump’s rhetoric and actions.
The impulse to “expunge” these impeachments seems to stem from a desire to sanitize Trump’s historical record. However, many commentators express skepticism about the feasibility and legitimacy of such an undertaking. The argument is often made that impeachment is a constitutional process with a historical record, and there is no established mechanism within the Constitution to retroactively erase these proceedings. The idea of an “expungement” is seen by some as akin to trying to “unshit your diaper” or simply making up a certificate to soothe an ego.
Furthermore, the prevailing sentiment among many is that history itself will ultimately be the arbiter of Trump’s legacy, regardless of any attempts to manipulate official records. The argument is that the impeachments, along with the underlying events, are indelible parts of his presidency that historians will continue to examine and discuss. The very act of trying to erase them is seen by some as a tacit admission of their significance and a desperate attempt to control a narrative that has already taken shape in the public consciousness.
The focus on expunging impeachments is also criticized as a distraction from more pressing issues. The sentiment is that time, resources, and political capital could be better spent addressing economic concerns like inflation, gas prices, and job opportunities, rather than engaging in what is perceived as a vanity project for Trump’s ego. This approach is seen by some as indicative of a “Me Me Me presidency,” where personal legacy takes precedence over the needs of the populace.
The notion that expunging the impeachments would somehow alter public memory or historical accounts is widely dismissed. Many believe that the events and the impeachments themselves are deeply ingrained in the collective consciousness and will be remembered regardless of any official record changes. The comparison is made to trying to “wipe our collective consciousness” or simply making up a feel-good certificate, which ultimately changes nothing of substance.
Ultimately, the reports of efforts to expunge President Trump’s impeachments highlight a broader ongoing debate about accountability, historical interpretation, and the enduring impact of political events. While the desire to reshape his legacy is understandable from his perspective, the prevailing view among many is that the mechanisms for such an endeavor are either non-existent or deeply flawed, and that history’s judgment is often more potent than any administrative workaround. The prospect of further impeachments is also mentioned, suggesting that any attempt to “clear the deck” might be a temporary measure at best.