Rep @RepAdamSchiff regarding Flynn allegations: it should “result in his immediate removal from office”.
@RepAdamSchiff (Democrat), Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, speaking on The Rachel Maddow show (02/10/2017) was frank in his assessment of the fallout from allegations that national security advisor, Michael T. Flynn, discussed sanctions with Russia prior to the election – and possibly misled administration officials about it.
If the allegations are proven, Schiff said that he (Flynn) must resign and that “stepping down will be the least of the worries of the Trump administration officials.” The implications indicate that the Trump campaign was directly colluding with the Russian government in their interference with the US election. This represents the first real impeachment possibility and could imply that the election itself is invalid.
There is no precedent to invalidating an election result in these circumstances. The judicial branch of government has previously intervened to decide an election result in Bush v Gore in 2000 following vote counting problems. Prior to this, the Supreme Court had never changed the outcome of an election. In a ‘normal’ impeachment process the Vice President would assume the Presidency, however, when the crime for which the President is being impeached is the election process itself, there are likely to be broader ramifications than just an impeachment.
Would there need to be another election? If this happens, then who governs the country while the new election occurs? There would be an instant power vacuum in the executive branch of Government and it is unclear who would fill it. However, it is clear that the Supreme court would have the final say should the charges against Flynn hold and the entire Trump administration collapses under the weight.
- Sources: NY Times
Correction: This quote by Schiff: “the least of the Trump administration’s problems” was corrected to: “the least of the worries of the Trump administration officials.” This does not change the meaning of the quote.
- Follow the discussion
— 🛡 resistanc.com (@randomizerity) February 11, 2017