In a socio-political terrain, where the mechanism of impeachment is to be actualized as a sacred public interest utility—to wield political actors to accountability—has been debased and diseased into an apparatus of politicization, promiscuity, and frivolousness.
Modernity’s hyper-partisan political climate has made the impeachment instrument a waning, menacing utility of checks and balances, broaching a semblance of political actors to be in a state of clover.
Richard Nixon, the deceased former president, is proverbially rolling in his grave, for the chagrin he postured, an impeachment saga’s blemishing would have yielded on his legacy.
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution blatantly defines impeachment as a utility for “treason, bribery, high crimes or other misdemeanors.”
Alejandro Mayorkas’ execution of an administration’s policy, to the detest of an antagonistic caucus, cannot suffice for impeachment in a solemn democratic union.
Mere dissension in a polity is not a potent rationale for the impeachment of a political officer; polity inroads and panaceas in a democracy get chiseled from the mountains of strife.
The unprecedented impeachment trial—if it had ensued into a conviction—would have impaired a concrete political thespian, in their realm of governance.
Genuine political thespians, must be accorded the insulation from non-frivolous impeachment articles, to concoct brazen policies of goodwill, sans the apprehension of unjust power winnowing.
