she looked at me and said, whose james madison? and i went home and drank. but this book, it was part of the work of the center for civic literacy at iupui. it's an effort to compile what every single citizen needs to know and understand about our government and our economy, and the difference between science and religion. one of the things that i am hopeful about is that we will reinvest in civic education. if we know what our constitution says, if we know what our history actually was, i am confident we can come to a lot of different agreement and put this country back on a path toward at least amnesty. if not, if were going to sort of huddle in our little filter bubbles and only believe what, going to the internet and have confirmation bias tell us where we are going, then the american experiment doesn't work. then we are this collection of quarreling constituencies all trying to contend for power, and we are not really american anymore. >> twice a month c-span cities tour takes booktv and american history tv on the road to explore the literary life and h

. >> james madison's copy actually has annotations by james madison. >> it says right here, mr. madison's copy. >> one of james madison's essays, federalist number 10, addresses the dangers of what he called factions and is often cited by people on both sides of the campaign finance debate. >> okay. thanks. >> federalist number 10? he is leaving us alone with the federalist papers. >> among the advantages promised by a well-construct ed union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. faction can be read as what? >> special interest groups. >> so this is basically talking about money and influence and large organizations? >> there are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction, the one by removing its causes, the other by controlling its effects. by removing its causes, how do you do that? you can't remove the causes of -- >> human nature. >> human nature or faction. right. >> i think you can control its effects. >> yeah. >> today the men and women entrusted with controlling the effects of money in politics

james madison, meet donald trump. >> there are no bribes. they're impeaching me, and there are no crimes. >> donald trump rages. >> two flimsy, pathetic, ridiculous articles of impeachment. >> while nancy pelosi stays the course. >> this is about the constitution of the united states. so don't mess with me. >> at issue, a phone call with the president of ukraine. >> my call was perfect. >> no pressure, no pushing, no quid pro quo. >> others heard much worse. >> he had a desperate man on the phone and he asked a desperate man for a favor. >> corruptly abusing the office of the presidency. >> the debate gets ugly fast. >> they dislike us so much they're willing to weaponize the government. this is scary stuff. it's dangerous for our country. >> come on, get real. be serious. we know exactly what happened here. 17 witnesses. it's uncontradicted. these people are stone cold crooked. >> then a verdict that turns a political divide into a chasm. >> the president is impeached. >> history becomes the only guide. bill clinton, impeached when he lied

james madison himself explained that allowing impeachment on that basis would mean the president serves at the pleasure of the congress instead of the pleasure of the american people. it would make the president a creature of congress, not the head of a separate and equal branch. so there were powerful reasons, mr. president, why congress after congress for 230 years -- 230 years -- required presidential impeachment to revolve around clear, recognizable crimes, even though that was not a strict limitation. powerful reasons why for 230 years no house -- no house opened the pandora's box of subjective political impeachment. that 230-year tradition died last night. now, mr. president, house democrats have tried to say they had to impeach president trump on this historically thin and subjective basis because the white house challenged their request for more witnesses. and that brings us to the second article of impeachment. the house titled this one obstruction of congress. what it really does is impeach the president for asserting presidential privilege. the concept of executive privilege

. >> james madison, the architect of the constitution warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the republic. another founder fear that a president may be bribed by a greater interest to betray his trust. he emphasized that this magistrate is not the king. the people are the king. >> tucker: so james madison has given nancy pelosi's personal seal of approval. remember that the next time pelosi's acolytes tried to pull addison statue off his pedestal for crimes against progressive orthodoxy. they are being presented as heroes. enjoy it while it lasts. the framers were read that corrupt americans might take money from foreign powers to do their bidding and that is why we need to be impeached donald trump, get it? wait a second, trump didn't take money from ukraine. hunter biden data. trump just pointed that out. he was on james madison's side, vigilantly policing bribery by hostile foreign power and for that he must be removed from office. that is the democratic party's position and if you are not sold yet, if you sense there might be a

i would just say that james madison, we've heard people intone james madison. he said at the convention of 1787 impeachment was for, quote, removal of an officer who had rendered himself justly criminal in the eyes of the majority of the people, closed quote. the majority of the people. you don't have that. what you have here is a slop bucket that you're calling your articles of impeachment. so what we've heard over the last two days is basically every grievance that democrats have against this president. you stuck the laid until that slop bucket and you try the throw it out there, and you've tried to pigeon hole that grievance into one of two things, either the obstruction of congress or abuse of power. that's -- that's the problem that you have here. is that you're all over the map because you can't deliver a crime. there is no high crime. there is no misdemeanor. remember, professor carlin tried to describe bribery, what the bribery might have been. it took her a full five minutes. and after she was done, we didn't hear anybody talk about bribery anymore as

she looked at me and said, whose james madison? i went home and drank. but this book, it was part of the work of the center for civic literacy. it's an effort to compile what every single citizen needs to know and understand about our government and our economy and the difference between science and religion. one of the things i am hopeful about is that we will win in civic education. if we know what our constitution says, if we know what our history actually was, i am confident we can come to a lot of different agreements and put this country back on a path at least toward amnesty. it's not. it's sort of huddling in our filter problems and only belie believe, go on to the internet and have confirmation bias tell us where we are going. then the american experiment doesn't work. it's a collection of constituencies all trying to contend for power. we are not really american anymore. >> twice a month, c-span cities tours takes book to be an american history tv on the road to explore literary life. working with our cable partners, various literary and histor

james madison said it was quote, undispensable that some provision be made for impeachment. why? he said standing for reelection was not a sufficient security against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president he said might betray his trust to foreign powers. a president in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic, closed quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention. morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who had introduced the motion to eliminate impeachment got up and said i was wrong. he told the other framers present he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of this debate is that the framers kept impeachment in the constitution specifically in order to protect against the abuse of office with the capacity to corrupt the electoral process or lead to

whatever james madison might think about it, you know, seriously. with regard to the phone call, you know, evidence at some point does matter. as much as i hear about trying to turn what was in the face of the call a request for assistance with regard to an investigation as equivalent to a demand that was coercive, that had conditions in order to dig dirt up on a political opponent, they are not the same thing. >> but what if it wasn't a quid pro quo? >> and an attempt to try to make them the same thing, i would suggest to you respectfully, if the object here is to garner what is necessary in order to impeach and remove a president from office, which is bipartisan support, today's effort frankly was dead on arrival. >> elie, the counter argument to that is if you are extorting somebody, you don't have to say "i am now extorting you." you can just, you know, have two statements of fact, which is this person wants aid. i want you to do me a favor. and isn't -- i mean you can make an argument, i guess, that there's an implied -- >> right. very much not

they had the terrific i think constitutional law professors and the more you hear about james madison the better it is for democrats. elevates this into something large and important. and the republicans have the opposite if the democrats want to elevate the republicans want to denigrate. you gave money to barack obama. and your mother dresses you funny. that's what they want to do. i think each executed on strategies. >> scott, is that how you see it. >> your mother dresses you empeckably by the way. >> recent development for me. >> number one, i thought turly was excellent today. i thought it was smart for the republicans to call a republican law professor who could say, look with, i didn't photo vote for donald trump didn't support him all the time this is why impeachment rushed is wrong. i thought that was smart. whereas the democrats called three people who have been on the band wagon some time. i thought professor carlin was hurtful because i thought she was petty in cases isn't that correcty and vit reelic and the others were more scholarly. number three i don't think the ball

names you recognize like john marshall, james madison, and a fellow named henry clay all had this job. great men of enduring legacy such as george marshall, dean atchison, henry kissinger. here at the mcconnell center, we already had the privilege as i think may have been mentioned to host six previous secretaries of state. george schultz was here for the opening of the program in 1991. madelieine albright, jim bakker, colin powell, condoleezza rice and hillary clinton. this morning it's our great honor to make it lucky number seven with the 70th united states secretary of state, mike pompeo. mike graduated top of his class from west point and served an accomplishment in any year, but wait until you hear about a few of mike's classmates. one is an elected member of congress and two serve as high ranking members of the state department. and one we had here, secretary of state mike esper all in the class of 1986 at west point. so this is not exactly a group of slackers. but mike rose to the very top. as a young cavalry officer mike was stationed in the divided german capital in the tenu

. >> james madison warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers and feared the president might be bribed by a greater interest. this is not a king. the people are the king. >> tucker: so james mads has given nancy pelosi his personal seal of approval. remember that the next time pelosi people try to pull madison's statue off its pedestal. for a brief moment they are presented as heroes. the framers pelosi said they were worried they might take money from foreign powers. trump didn't take money from ukraine. hunter biden did. if you are not sold yet and sense there might be links missing from the logic chain nancy pelosi has an answer. not an argument but a cliche bomb. important facts are being delivered. it's like the old song i drove my chevy to the levy but the levy was dry. it doesn't mean anything. listen to nancy pelosi's rendition of it. >> a republic we can keep said benjamin franklin. the president leaves us no choice but to act because he is trying to corrupt once again the election for his own benefit. the president has engaged in abuse of power undermining our

. >> alexander hamilton. >> thomas jefferson. >> alexander hamilton. >> james madison. >> benjamin franklin. madison. >> benjamin franklin let's be honest, quitting smoking is freaking hard. like quitting every monday hard. quitting feels so big. so, try making it smaller. and you'll be surprised at how easily starting small... ...can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette >>> as the impeachment embroils both parties on capitol hill, congress members from both sides every day are invoking the founding fathers to bolt sister their cases for or against impeachment. >> benjamin franklin cautioned when asked what he had given us a republic. >> i don't think they would be pleased to see congress subverting the will of democracy by holding impeachment vote because they cannot accept the 2016 elections. >> alexander hamilton wrote in the federalist papers. >> that impeachment would be drench bipartisan animosity. >> one of our founders warned. >> thomas jefferson said i know of no safe depository but the people themselves. >> that is why alexander hamilton wrote. >> james madison. >>

no, we all will speak for james madison about the same level of accuracy. that's what we get paid for. i want to note a couple of things. i do find it rather surprising that you would have george washington in this jury pool. i would strike him for cause. george washington was the first guy to raise extreme executive privilege claim ls. claims. if you are going to make a case over george washington with another head of state, i expect his hair and powder hair would catch on fire. i want to note one other thing. i am impressed of carrying an 18 century copy of johnson with you. >> it is just the online version. >> as an academic, i was darn impressed. i just want to know one thing that may explain part of our difference. statues today on bravery are written broadly just like they were back then. that was my point. the meaning of those words are subjected to interpretation, they're written broadly because they don't want it to be narrow. that's the case in the 1800 century as they are today. the idea of bad practices could be the definition of bribery, really

>> only i speak for james madison. no, no. we all h speak for james madison. i just want to note a couple things. i do find it rather surprising that you would have george washington in this jury pool. i would strike him for cause. george washington had a rather robust view of what a president could say. if you were going to make a case to george washington that you could impeach over a conversation he had with another head of state. i expect his powdered hair would catch on fire. also i just want to know one other thing. i am impressed with carrying an 18th century copy of samuel johnson with you. >> it's just the online version. >> as an academic i was pretty darn impressed. i just want to note one thing, which may explain part of our difference. the statutes today on bravery are written broadly just like they were back then. the meaning is subject to interpretation. they're written broadly because they don't want them to be too narrow. that was the case in the 18th century as they are today. but the idea that bad practices could be the definition of bribery

madison said in the federalist papers that the people are the primary check in government power there will be an election the republicans are you know have said this should be decided by the people it will be because republicans in the senate there's no evidence right now anyways that they will take any action so the people decide and what the people are going to decide is whether we have a functioning constitutional republic with free and fair elections it's a very dramatic moment for the country. gerry not the chairman of the committee and then daniel goleman later the democratically that both made a point about the president's personal lawyer rudy giuliani who has been in ukraine pretty much trying to dig up more dirt and the president's been saying all a hope he finds something more. i mean what does that represent is that i mean all this evidence is talking about stuff which is already happened but actually possibly it's all still going on right now. it is going on right now on your i think you bring it up it's hard to keep track of all the details here but that's a particularly

during the constitutional convention, james madison, the architect of the constitution, warned a president -- president -- of president may be bribed by greater interests to betray his trust. this was not that a king. the people are the king. they therefore created a constitutional remedy to protest against that protect against a dangerous or corrupt leader, impeachment. unless the constitution contained in impeachment provision, one founder warned, a president might "spare no effort or means whatsoever to get himself reelected." insisted, george mason they president who procures his appointment their improper and corrupt acts might repeat his guilt and return to power. during the debate over impeachment at the constitutional convention, george mason asked to any man -- should any man be about justice? should he be above it who can commit the most extensive injustice? in his great wisdom he knew that injustice committed by the president erodes the rule of law. justice,idea of fair the bedrock of our democracy. if we allow a president to be above the law, we do so surely at the peril of our

. >> that george washington, james madison, the creators of the constitution would be rolling their eyes if you read hamilton in the federalist papers and it's paper 59. he wanted the senate to have the trial because they would be impartial, and they would render fair judgment. mcconnell is defying what the constitution is urging and calling upon us to do as senators. >> are you impartial when you refer earlier you mentioned the president as seeming guilty because he would not allow the witnesses. >> our quest here is for the facts, and we -- these are not witnesses we know that are preordained. we don't know what they will say, and so yes, we are trying to get to the bottom of this to get all of the facts out. show us the truth. show us the facts and then we can each make a decision and hopefully an impartial decision. mcconnell won't do that, but i hope our senators would not. i would ask every one of my republican senators, are you proud to be partial and to be partisan in this august proceeding? i hope not. >> senator schumer, thank you very much for your time tonight, sir. >> nice t

it is why in debating the constitution james madison warned that because the presidency was to be administered by a single man his corruption might be fatal to the republic and this scheme by president trump was so brazen so clear supported by documents and actions sworn testimony. on contradicted contemporaneous records it is hard to imagine that anybody could dispute those acts let alone argue that that conduct does not constitute an impeachable offense or offenses this is a big deal president trump did what a present of our nation is not allowed to do it is why last week the constitutional scholar professor michael gary hart said if what we're talking about is not impeachable then nothing is impeachable president trump's actions are impeachable offenses they threaten our rule of law they threaten our institutions and as james madison warned us they threaten our republic let me begin where we must with the facts and evidence 1st it's important to understand why ukraine was so important to our national security ukraine was under attack by its aggressive and hostile neighbor russia they had al

james madison, another author of the federalist papers, wrote, the danger of legislative abuse must lead to the same tyranny as is threatened by executive abuse. the founders did not want impeachment to be used for political or partisan battles. if my colleagues do not want to follow the constitutional high standards for undoing a national election, perhaps you could have followed speaker pelosi's standard, at least the one she promised to follow back in march. it was a very sensible standard. she says, impeachment is so divisive that the evidence must be overwhelming, compelling and bipartisan. not one of those criterias have been met today. based on the facts, based on the evidence, based on the truth, this impeachment even fails that pelosi test. those now who say removing president trump would protect the integrity of our democracy have it backwards. by removing a duly elected president on empty articles of impeachment, congress will erode the public trust in our system of government. i understand you dislike the president. his beliefs, the way he governs, and even the people who vot

he's authored seven books, including a biography of james madison as well as many essays and articles on constitutional subjects. professor feldman received his undergraduate degree from harvard college, doctor of philosophy from oxford university and a j.d. from yale law school. he also served as a law clerk to justice david suitor of the united states supreme court. pamela carline serves as the montgomery professor of public interest law and tat stanford lw school. she's an author of keeping faith of the constitution and dozens of scholarly articles. she served as a law clerk to justice harry blackburn of the united states supreme court and as a deputy assistant attorney gener general. she earned three degrees from yale university. a b.a. in history, an m.a. in history and a j.d. from yale law school. michael garehart is a professor of jurisprudence at the university of north carolina school of law and director of unc's center for law and government. he's the author of many books, including federal impeachment process, the constitutional and historical analysis. as well as more than

james madison, the principal draftsman then spoke up. he said it was, quote, indispensable that some pro vig vision be made for impeachment. he said standing for re-election was, quote, not a sufficient security, closed quote, against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president he said might betray his trust to foreign powers. a president who in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency, said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic, closed quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention. governor morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who had introduced the motion to eliminate the impeachment from the constitution, got up and said the words i was wrong. he told the other framers present that he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th, and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process, a president would have to be subject to impeachment, regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of this debate is that t

james madison, the principle draftsman of the u.s. constitution then spoke up. he said, it was quote, indispensable that some provision be made for impeachment. why? because he explained standing for re-election was quote not a sufficient security, closed quote, against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president he said might betray his trusts to foreign powers. a president who in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency, said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic. closed quote. and then, a remarkable thing happened in the convention. gordon morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who would introduce the motion to eliminate impeachment got up and actually instead the words, i was wrong. he told the other framers present that he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process, a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of this debate is that the f

and william henry harrison dropped that in april 18, '41 the last founding father, james madison, has been dead for four years and there is nobody to ask. i could go through close call after close call, but i will tell you three of my favorite stories. what is me kind of constitutionally geeking out so what the constitution said in 1865 when lincoln was assassinated, if there is a double vacancy, the president pro tem for ends up as an acting president and the secretary of state has the constitutional authority to make that happen and call special elections for the following november you go back to the evening of april 14, 1865, lincoln shot, andrew johnson would have been murdered had -- another part of the lincoln murder conspiracy went in to go kill william seward, secretary of state and seward was in his bed and stabbed him repeatedly. seward almost died. what happens if there is no secretary of state to make the president pro tem the acting president and call a special election was shockingly the constitution is very clear about this. the assistant secretary of state has the auth

you might go off to princeton in the way james madison did but if you are going to go to college during the colonial period, will you marry is your only option and there are no universities to the south of virginia to go to until after the revolution. and he writes as long as i stay on the mountain come and it's what would later be monticello, he lives on the plantation which is at the foot of the mountain, but that's cold mountain sometimes. the loss of one fourth of my time is inevitable by companies coming here and detaining me. in other words, his social life is too rich if he stays and he's trying to justify to the executors he will learn more if he goes away to school, so he's an unusual young man, the first and probably the last that will claim he will party less if he goes to college. it turns out he got into some hijinks, he did go to college but in the end, he is about the most studious person to go to the college of william and mary. in 1808 looking back on it 40 years later and he's writing today. code about a grandson's education and he says that he credits education from s

madison quote might be fatal to the republic close quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention gouverneur morris of pennsylvania one of the 2 people who had introduced the motion to eliminate impeachment from the constitution got up and actually said the words i was wrong he told the other framers present that he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election the upshot of this debate is that the framers kept impeachment in the constitution specifically in order to protect against the abuse of office with the capacity to corrupt the electoral process or it lead to personal gain now turning to the language of the constitution the framers used the words high crimes and misdemeanors to describe those forms of action and that they considered impeachable these were not vague or abstract terms to the framers high crimes and

you might go to princeton the way james madison did but if you're going to go to college in virginia, it is your only option and there are no universities to the south of virginia to go to until after the revolution and he writes as long as i stay on the mountain and the mountain is what is monticello but lives on the plantation at the foot of the mountain, a place called chadwick. as long as i stay on the mountain the loss of one fourth of my time is inevitable by companies detaining me from school. and learn more as he goes away to school. he is an unusual young man, the first and last that can plausibly claim to college. they got in some hijinks. he is the most studious person in the college of william and mary. looking back on it 48 years later writing to the grandson's education and credit education for saving him from, quote, the society of horse racers and if he hadn't been saved from that company he would become as worthless. this is mixed feelings about virginians. they are gregarious, sociable, generous, not intellectual, not particularly hard-working, talking about the free

>> men are not angels, as james madison warned us in federalist 51. we have dangerously skirted the need for rules with faisal. that is why we need to either scrap it altogether or majorly overhaul it. i look at that scathing rebuke from the judge, and i say that is such an unusual, extraordinary thing. we ought to be very concerned about our government on the way it handles things, specially ought to not give it unlimited, unfettered, unreviewable power to spy on the american people, which is what fisa does. >> shannon: you've got people all over the spectrum, from the aclu to far right on the hill, saying the same thing, and we should all be very wary of what is going on. we will watch and see what you guys do. we watch on the trial, as well. in the meantime, merry christmas. >> thank you, merry christmas to you. >> shannon: them impeachment of president trump is official. mollie hemingway and more straight ahead. the most accurate a .. what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service ap

demagoguery was a second one. >> james madison and donald trump have nothing in common. but the trump character was alive and well at the time of the american revolution. somebody with blarny and salesmanship and a pension for being a d bei being a demagogue. >> reporter: and whether you think he's guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, the underlying questions are exactly what the founders were concerned about. >> what if a president, perhaps, has lied, what if a president worked with a foreign power? what if a president started to make money off the office of the presidency? that's a president who should be removed. >> very good report by jaime. presidential historian joins me now. dp evening. so looking that intelligence committee was report now that they put out. when you think about the founding fathers, what do you think the concerns they may have? >> about everything with donald trump. it fact he's trying to undermine our institutions. the fact that people that work in the federal government are constantly being browbeat, humiliated. the fact that president trump

that quote is from james madison. the part of this debate that has been so frustrating for me, and i think for a lot of americans who are watching tonight, is the diminishment of the public servants, the patriots, who stepped forward and provided the evidence that demonstrates that this president abused his power. people like lieutenant colonel vindman, who served this country bravely overseas. people like ambassador bill taylor, a west point graduate, a vietnam veteran, people like doctor fiona hill, people like laura cooper. official after official, after official from the trump administration. these individuals serve in the presidents administration. ambassador taylor was not appointed by president obama. he was appointed by president trump. i would hope that my colleagues, is we proceed with the solemn duty that this committee is charged with, that we respect the people who came forward, who have served under republican and democratic administrations, to tell the truth undergrowth, and to help this committee as it

he is on the steering committee for the federal society miami chapter and is on the james madison institute board of directors and a member of the american enterprise institute's leadership network. justin was kind last night to have dinner with a group of law helpful ind was very helping them think through their career plans, their studies, their curricula, and he is also generous to be giving his time here to us today so please join us in welcoming justin pearson. [applause] mr. pearson: thank you for that generous introduction. thank you all for having me. it's an honor to be here. i have one of the greatest jobs in the world. i sue the government. it's a lot of fun. i highly recommend it. justice, i never sue for money and i never charge my clients anything. my salary and costs are paid for by over 14,000 donors. i go across the nation representing all business owners pro bono, free of charge. this is something i love doing. it's tied into the whole reason i went to law school in the first place. my mom is a small business owner in florida and i went to law school because i wanted to re

that was the james madison playbook. founders didn't want a king, they didn't want a dictator, they didn't want a monarch. they want ad democracy. mike: congressman, your reaction to the clip? >> i get along with mr. jeffries. i would say he is all wrong about impeachment here. the deal is this, when james madison and the founders were debating impeachment, they put that into the constitution and debate in the constitutional convention is very clear. they put that in there, if you have an executive that is so dangerous to this country you need to remove him immediately. that is why they put in high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery and treason. those are very unique, very emergency type situations. if this is an emergency type situation, why have the democrats trying for three plus years to remove this president? it just does not ring true when i hear somebody say, well we didn't run to be impeaching a president or we're not in it with a preconceived notion. the reality is, it has been cooked in for three years on the democr

james madison, the principle draftsman of the u.s. constitution then spoke up. he said it was, quote, indispensable that some provision be made for impeachme impeachment. why? because he explained, standing for re-election was, quote, not a sufficient security, closed quote, against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president he said, might betray his trust to foreign powers. a president who in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency, said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic, close quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention. governor morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who introduced the motion to eliminate impeachment from the constitution, got up and actually said the words, i was wrong. he told the other framers present that he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process, a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of th

james madison said it was quote, undispensable that some provision be made for impeachment. why? he said standing for reelection was not a sufficient security against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president he said might betray his trust to foreign powers. a president in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic, closed quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention. morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who had introduced the motion to eliminate impeachment got up and said i was wrong. he told the other framers present he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of this debate is that the framers kept impeachment in the constitution specifically in order to protect against the abuse of office with the capacity to corrupt the electoral process or lead to

james madison, meet donald trump. >> there are no bribes. they're impeaching me, and there are no crimes. >> donald trump rages. >> two flimsy, pathetic, ridiculous articles of impeachment.

james madison the main framer who was as much of the believer in democracy is anybody in the world that they nevertheless felt that the united states' system should be designed and indeed was his initiative was designed so that power should be in the hands of the wealthy . because the wealthy are their more responsible set of men and therefore the structure of the formal constitutional system placed most power in the hands of the senate or the senate was not elected in those days it was selected from the wealthy men as madison put it had sympathy for property owners in their right. to read the debates at the constitutional convention. madison the major concern of the society has to be to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. and here argument suppose everyone had to vote freely and say well the majority of the poor get together and they would organize to take away the property of the rich and he said that would obviously be unjust so you can't have that so therefore the constitutional system has to be set up to prevent democracy. which is of some interest that this d

james madison the main framer who was as much of a believer in democracy is anybody in the world that they nevertheless felt that the united states system should be designed and indeed was his initiative was designed so that power should be in the hands of the wealthy. because the wealthier there are more responsible set of men and therefore the structure of the formal constitutional system placed most power in the hands of the senate or the senate was not elected in those days it was selected from the wealthy men as madison put it had sympathy for property owners in their right. to read the debates at the constitutional convention. madison the major concern of the society has to be to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. and here argument suppose everyone had to vote freely as they will the majority of the poor get together and they would organize to take away the property of the rich and he said that would obviously be unjust so he can't have that so therefore the constitutional system has to be set up to prevent democracy. which is of some interest that this de

james madison the main framer who was as much of a believer in democracy is anybody in the world that they nevertheless felt that the united states system should be designed and indeed was his initiative was designed so that power should be in the hands of the wealthy. because the wealthier there are more responsible set of men and therefore the structure of the formal constitutional system placed most power in the hands of the senate or the senate was not elected in those days it was selected from the wealthy men as madison put it had sympathy for property owners in their right. to read the debates at the constitutional convention. madison the major concern of the society has to be to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. and here argument suppose everyone had to vote freely as they will the majority of the poor get together and they would organize to take away the property of the rich and he said that would obviously be unjust so you can't have that so therefore the constitutional system has to be set up to prevent democracy. which is of some interest that this d

james madison the main framer who was as much of a believer in democracy is anybody in the world that they nevertheless felt that the united states system should be designed and indeed was his initiative was designed so that power should be in the hands of the wealthy. because the wealthy are their more responsible set of men and therefore the structure of the formal constitutional system placed most power in the hands of the senate or the senate was not elected in those days it was selected from the wealthy men as madison put it had sympathy for property owners in their right. to read the debates at the constitutional convention. madison the major concern of the society has to be to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. and hear argument suppose everyone had to vote freely as they will the majority of the poor get together and they would organize to take away the property of the rich and he said that would obviously be unjust so he can't have that so therefore the constitutional system has to be set up to prevent democracy. which is of some interest that this deba

james madison the main framer who was as much of the believer in democracy is anybody in the world that they nevertheless felt that the united states' system should be designed and indeed was his initiative was designed so that power should be in the hands of the wealthy . because the wealthier there are more responsible set of men and therefore the structure of the formal constitutional system placed most power in the hands of the senate or the senate was not elected in those days it was selected from the wealthy men as madison put it had sympathy for property owners in their right. to read the debates at the constitutional convention. madison says the major concern of the society has to be to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. and here argument suppose everyone had to vote freely as they will the majority of the poor get together and they would organize to take away the property of the rich and he said that would obviously be unjust so he can't have that so therefore the constitutional system has to be set up to prevent democracy. which is of some interest that

james madison himself explained that allowing impeachment on that basis would mean they serve at the pleasure of the congress instead of the pleasure of the american people. it would make a president a creature of congress, not aheade head of a separate and equal branch. so there are powerful reasons why for 230 years required for presidential impeachment to revolve around clear recognizable crimes even though that was not a strict limitation. powerful reasons why for 230 years, no house opened the pandora's box of subjective, political impeachment. the 230 year tradition died last night. house democrats are trying to say they had to impeach president trump on this subjective basis because the white house challenged their request for more witnesses and that brings us to the second article of impeachment. the house titled this one obstruction of congress. what it really does is impeached a president for asserting presidential privilege. the concept of executive privilege is another two centuries old constitutional tradition. the president starting with george washington, federal court

james madison worried a president might lose hi capacity, pervert his administration or even worse betray his trust to foreign powers. >> this is a theme that george washington hammers over and over again, no foreign influence in our early republic. >> reporter: and in the 18th century, impeachment was certainly more civilized than the alternative. >> before there was impeachment, the only course would be assassination. better to be put on trial, franklin argued, than to face the knife. >> reporter: after much debate the constitutional congress settled on these charges, treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. >> it is remarkably simple. it is a crime against the state, a crime against the people. you have don't need to break a law to commit a high crime. >> reporter: the founders expected the process would be partisan. but they probably didn't envision this. >> president zelensky, quote, loves your ass. >> was there a quid pro quo? >> the answer is yes. >> reporter: or this -- >> a corrupt witch hunt. >> it is a perfect call. a perfect call. >> this is a hoax. >> what do y

james madison, the principal draftsman of the u.s. constitution then spoke up. he said it was, quote, indispensable that some provision be made for impeachment. why? because, he explained, standing for re-election was, quote, not a sufficient security, close quote, against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president, he said, might betray his trust to foreign powers. a president who in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency, said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic, close quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention. morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who had introduced the motion to eliminate impeachment from the constitution, got up and actually said the words, i was wrong. he told the other framers present that he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process, a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of this debate

james madison said it was quote, undispensable that some provision be made for impeachment. why? he said standing for reelection was not a sufficient security against presidential misconduct or corruption. a president he said might betray his trust to foreign powers. a president in a corrupt fashion abused the office of the presidency said james madison, quote, might be fatal to the republic, closed quote. and then a remarkable thing happened in the convention. morris of pennsylvania, one of the two people who had introduced the motion to eliminate impeachment got up and said i was wrong. he told the other framers present he had changed his mind on the basis of the debate on july 20th and that it was now his opinion that in order to avoid corruption of the electoral process a president would have to be subject to impeachment regardless of the availability of a further election. the upshot of this debate is that the framers kept impeachment in the constitution specifically in order to protect against the abuse of office with the capacity to corrupt the electoral process or lead to

james madison, meet donald trump. >> there are no bribes. they're impeaching me, and there are no crimes. >>