Impeachment - It's Not Just for Presidents

It seems like centuries now, but let’s take a trip back in time to just a little less than a decade ago.

It was October 2016. FBI Director James Comey came before the American people and released a report about Sec. of State Hillary Clinton that seemed so damning at the time. By keeping official emails on her own private server, she was officially rebuked for being “extremely careless” with classified information. She wouldn’t be charged because Comey didn’t believe that she acted with criminal intent, but with 11 days left before Election Day, his accusation that she didn’t preserve and protect Federal communication records was enough to sink her campaign.

Fast forward to Mar. 15, 2025. Sec. of Defense Pete Hegseth, Sec. of State Marco Rubio, Sec. of the Treasury Scott Bessent, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Vice President J. D. Vance, among others, took part in a group chat on Signal instant messaging service. The open-source app was chosen in part because it had a timer function that automatically deleted a message once it had been viewed.

Clinton was given the benefit of the doubt about whether she should be criminally charged for her private server partly because, despite unfounded accusations to the contrary, evidence was never found that she deleted her emails. Had such evidence been documented, it could be argued that she was keeping emails on a private server to prevent the retention of records, an enforceable requirement under the Federal Records Act (FRA).

Obviously, Hegseth and the other participants of the group chat were using Signal because it wouldn’t retain records. Indeed, none of us might have ever known about it if Mike Walz, National Security Advisor, hadn’t accidentally included Jeffrey Goldberg, Editor in Chief of The Atlantic, as a participant. It’s hard to imagine a way to not describe this as an intentional violation of the FRA.

So, the Republicans have broken the law. Who's going to prosecute them?

The answer of who should prosecute them is in the US Constitution, specifically Article II, Section 4.

Article II, Section 4: The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Impeachment is a Congressional prerogative where criminal charges are first considered and then tried. For the US Congress, articles of impeachment are first brought before the House of Representatives (the body that hosts delegates from across the Union who represent districts of relatively similar-sized populations). Any Representative may draw up such articles. As with any bill or resolution, articles of impeachment are discussed before the House and then voted on. If a majority of Representatives vote yes, then the person is considered impeached.

Impeachment, though, does not mean removal. Once impeached by the House, the defendant is made to face the Senate (the body that consists of two delegates for each state). This body considers the same arguments and evidence much like a jury trial. In this case, though, to find the defendant guilty requires a two-thirds majority of members present. If all members are present at the time, that would mean 67 votes would be required for removal.

Again, articles of impeachment may be drawn up against the President, the Vice President, and any civil Officer of the United States on the basis that they have committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The definition of a civil Officer of the United States was not specified in Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, but in general, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 provides guidance over who this covers.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

This means any ambassador, public ministers and consuls, Supreme Court justices, and others appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Except for Jeffrey Goldberg and one CIA official whose identity was never revealed publicly (at the request of the agency), pretty much every participant in the Signal group chat can be impeached for violating both their obligation to protect the security of our country’s communications, but also the FRA.

Why is the FRA so important? The answer is simple – transparency. Records are kept to document that our public officials are carrying out their duties under their legal mandates and in a legally appropriate fashion. If there is any question about whether an official has violated either of these constraints, records are there to show whether this is the case or not.

For those who take their public trust seriously, documentation offers proof that they have done everything that is expected of them. A person doing their job can refer to the records and clear up any accusations of wrongdoing. For those who don’t, documentation only provides condemnation and a warning to the public that the person doesn’t deserve the public’s trust.

The Signal chat, if preserved in total, would allow for oversight. If the material was unclassified, it could be released by the government through normal channels (the Freedom of Information Act, etc.). If the material had been classified, as discussions of an attack on a foreign enemy would naturally be, that oversight would have come from within the government following its standards for protecting information from adversaries (without it falling into the hands of a surprised journalist).

It should be noted that nothing remains classified forever. Indeed, after 25 years, records determined to have permanent historical value are generally rendered publicly available. There are nine exceptions to this rule:

1. Identities of confidential human intelligence sources

2. Information on weapons of mass destruction

3. Information that would impair US cryptology

4. Information that would impair US technological advantages

5. US war plans that remain in effect

6. Information that could cause serious harm to US international relations

7. Information that would put the President, Vice President, or other public officials at risk

8. Information that would impair emergency preparedness plans or vulnerabilities

9. Information that if revealed would violate a statute, treaty, or international agreement

In short, the FRA is there to protect responsible government officials from unfounded accusations, and to preserve a historical record for future generations to refer to as needed. Violating this law does significant harm to both of these worthy efforts. Those who have violated the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor, should face public condemnation and removal from office.