Congressional Legislators talk about impeachment of the President as if it requires some action by the President that is either immoral or illegal or so outrageous as to warrant it. But impeachment is actually the Constitution’s way of firing the guy we hired in the last election. With that in mind, we shouldn’t need an action to fire him. How about if he is just incompetent? It is obvious to any objective observer that this President is actually unfit for the position.
Since the President claims to be a great businessman, let us look at his performance as the hired Chief Executive Officer of our company, America INC.
Since being appointed CEO of our company, he has put the company at a disadvantage in the current market. Passed private company information to a competitor. Embarrassed the Company at several industry meetings and caused our industry partners to doubt the validity of our commitment to contracts we have with them.
As the owners of America INC it is obvious that this disaster of a CEO must be removed before he damages the company any further. The way to do that is for the board to vote to remove him and Impeachment is exactly that. Congress does this. The House lists the reasons to fire him and the Senate votes on whether to fire him or not, it is that simple.
The notion that we need concrete proof of some action is simply not true. Being incompetent should be reason enough.