House Democrats have brought articles of impeachment which are attempting to impeach President Trump for having "corrupt motives" when temporarily deciding to withhold lethal aid to Ukraine.

During the impeachment proceedings last week, Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) informed the senators:

The President asked Ukraine for this investigation for one reason and one reason only: because he knew it would be damaging to an opponent who was consistently beating him in the polls and therefore it could help him get reelected in 2020.

The Constitution states that a president "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Did the Framers of the Constitution envision that "corrupt motives" would ever become an impeachable offense?  Let's answer that question with a little thought experiment.  Suppose that in any president's first four years in office, he will make 300 decisions of consequence regarding foreign policy.  For argument's sake, assume that these decisions fall into one of three categories: decisions that will aid in re-electing the president, decisions that will harm the president's re-election efforts, and decisions that neither hurt nor help.  Further, suppose for clarity's sake that the 300 decisions clearly fall in equal numbers for the three categories: 100 helping, 100 neutral, and 100 harmful.

If the Democrats' attempt to invent a new standard for impeachment, corrupt motives, survives, then a future president may very well decide that those 100 decisions that could be construed as "helping" his reelection efforts are not worth the risk of impeachment from a hostile House of Representatives.  The Dems will have created a scenario where positive decisions to help the U.S. will tend to be avoided by future presidents.  Maybe this sounds far-fetched, but consider the cloud of impeachment hanging over each one of these 100 decisions and tell me not a single one of them will be impacted.

I remember that when my daughter was just 9 or 10 years old, she would repeatedly and emphatically inform us what so-and-so was thinking, even though she never heard so-and-so speak the words she was so eagerly inserting into their minds and thoughts.  Eventually, as my daughter grew in emotional maturity and ability to use logic, she understood that each of us and no one else is privy to our own thinking processes.  She learned that unless someone tells you what he is thinking and what his motivations are, you can only guess at them.  People are complicated, and for one person to assign motives and thought processes to another is foolish, a lesson most of us have learned.

The Dems' impeachment process will run its course, and Trump will remain in office.  Once the vote in the Senate has been taken, it is time for patriotic Democrats to publicly denounce the House's attempt to make "corrupt motives" grounds for removing a duly elected president.  Constitutional professors like Barack Obama and the Yale and Harvard Law faculty, the American Bar Association, and Supreme Court justices like Ruth Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor must all stand up to vehemently denounce this attack on our Constitution.

This is your hour, patriotic Democrats.  This is your great opportunity to preserve our constitutional republic.  America waits, hopes, and prays you will prove yourselves worthy of the trust it has given you.