• Tweeter

  • republish

Members of the Judiciary Committee, which sits on Capitol Hill on December 4, 2019. Saul Loeb / Pool via REUTER

The second phase of the impeachment proceedings began on Wednesday before the Chamber's Judiciary Committee. The Democrats called four legal experts to testify, to demonstrate that Donald Trump violated the law by seeking an investigation of his political opponent from a foreign head of state.

With our correspondent in Washington, Anne Corpet

The debate is this time on the legal aspect of the procedure initiated by the Democrats. The merits of the case, the facts alleged against Donald Trump were examined for two months by the Intelligence Committee, which returned at the beginning of the week a thick report of conclusion. The question now is whether the US President's call to his Ukrainian counterpart, whether the pressure on Kiev to obtain compromising information about his political opponent, and whether Donald Trump's attempts to curb the Congress , constitute crimes that may result in his dismissal.

The level of obstruction of this administration is unprecedented. Never has a president fought so hard at the Congressional assignments.

Jerry Nadler, chairman of the Judiciary Committee 04/12/2019 - by RFI Play

" The level of obstruction of this administration is unprecedented. Never has a president fought so hard at the Congressional summonses , "indignant Jerry Nadler, chairman of the commission in his opening statement.

Four legal experts convened

Three of the four experts convened, all well-known law professors, say it forcefully: for them, not only did Donald Trump actually abuse his power, but it is precisely the type of crime that the editors of the Constitution had envisaged when they invented the impeachment procedure.

The fourth witness is more circumspect. He denounced the anger and divisions created by this affair and considered that removing the President for the alleged facts of Donald Trump would lower the criteria hitherto applied in this type of procedure. But this is of course the witness called by the Republicans. Like political opinions, legal opinions vary so much according to the camp from which they emanate.