WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING

To Republicans, the impeachment drive looks less like a somber, quasi-judicial proceeding and more like something concocted by Dean Wormer to expel John Belushi’s “Bluto” Blutarsky and Delta House from Faber College. … The secret hearings, scheduled by Chairman Adam Schiff, can continue as long as he wants, calling only his witnesses. He will then write a report, saying the evidence was appalling and unrefuted … It’s not hard for Republicans to attack this whole process as fundamentally unfair. They say, rightly, that it violates the most basic tenets of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence:

Accusations must be specific and backed by clear evidence. All evidence and accusations must be presented in open court. Rules of procedure must be fixed and unbiased, not arbitrary and ad hoc. The accused is presumed innocent and must be given full rights to see all the evidence, confront the accusers, and rebut all charges, including cross-examining witnesses, challenging documents, and presenting exculpatory evidence. …

Although impeachment is a political act, it is still governed by the constitutional requirement limiting it to “high crimes and misdemeanors,” such as treason and bribery.

The Framers specifically rejected a proposal to include “malfeasance in office,” fearing it would open the process to vague charges and transform our system of divided powers into a unified parliamentary system, controlled by Congress. …

The public can assess whether those leading the inquiry are even-handed or hell-bent to remove the president. … Americans treasure these rules as bulwarks of our democratic freedom. The House majority breaks them at its peril.