Former U.S. representative for Michigan's 3rd congressional district and founder of the Liberty Caucus, Justin Amash, who was the first Republican congressman to call for the impeachment of President Trump, has now taken to Twitter to defend him.
On Sunday, Amash - who is well known for his distaste of President Trump - made a post on Twitter outlining why he believes Trump's indictment is in error because of Trump's actions being "political contention".
"I may not like Trump, but I love our Constitution, so I feel compelled to speak out. The latest indictment, which I encourage everyone to read, attempts to criminalize Trump’s routine misstatements of fact and law in connection with the 2020 election," Amash wrote. "But this is precisely the sort of wrong that must be addressed politically under our Constitution, not criminally."
"Our system can’t survive if political disputes are removed to the criminal realm. There’s no limiting principle to such an approach," he continued.
He wrote: "Remind me again which former presidents have been indicted for going to war without congressional approval, spying on Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment, abusing emergency declarations to bypass checks and balances, or ignoring legal advisers to pursue a clearly unlawful policy."
"We don’t criminalize these actions, egregious as they are, because they are matters of political contention. We’re allowed to disagree about the workings of our constitutional system without fear of criminal reprisal," he continued.
Amash added: "Politicians are constantly misguided and just plain mistaken about a lot of things—often remarkably so. It endangers all Americans to begin treating politicians’ false beliefs regarding political or constitutional matters, even when they’re obviously wrong, as criminal offenses."
"We impeach people for violating the public trust—for political misconduct or serious incompetence. We reject them. We vote them out. We never again elect them. We don’t imprison them," he wrote.
Finally, he concluded: "As an aside: Even on Jack Smith’s own terms—even assuming the applicability of the cited statutes to a political dispute—the indictment falls woefully short. Showing that others repeatedly told Trump he was wrong is not sufficient to prove he sought to defraud the United States or to corruptly obstruct an election. Proving Trump’s state of mind beyond a reasonable doubt—proving fraudulent or corrupt intent—requires much more than Smith alleges."
via zerohedge