Latin lesson

Let me just say at the outset that I am not a lawyer, have never studied law, and therefore cannot in any way claim that what I am about to write here has any veracity.

We have been hearing endlessly about an alleged “quid pro quo.” On the assumption that much of the American public is not able to absorb the meanings of Latin phrases, let alone recognize that they are long established concepts in our legal system, the media and politicians have come to focusing on bribery and extortion, which I suppose they assume people can better understand.

The way quid pro quo is being used currently is based on the definition of this term as referring to a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something. But in that case, is quid pro quo the right phrase to use to describe the actions of which the President is being accused? I am not quite sure how this came to be the misdeed of which Mr. Trump is accused, although it may well have been his own insistence that there was “no quid pro quo here.”

The main reason given by the House of Representatives for moving toward impeachment comes from a well-documented conversation between President Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky, the Prime Minister of Ukraine. In response to Mr. Zelensky’s request to President Trump to release the aid package previously promised to Ukraine, the President said “I would like you to do us a favor though.” The particular favor for which the President was seeking Ukraine’s assistance was providing negative information on the former Vice President of the United States and current candidate for President, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter.

So how does all of this relate to impeachment? Impeachable offenses fall into the following categories:

• Bribery: the offering, giving, soliciting, or receiving of any item of value as a means of influencing the actions of an individual holding a public or legal duty

• Treason: the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government

and

• Other high crimes and misdemeanors: allegations of misconduct by officials. Offenses by officials also include ordinary crimes, but perhaps with different standards of proof and punishment than for non-officials, on the grounds that more is expected of officials by their oaths of office. Indeed, the offense may not even be a breach of criminal statute.

The first category would seem to be most relevant in this case. It will ultimately be in the hands of the American people and our elected officials to determine whether any of the President’s actions meet this definition. 

But simply the fact that we are having this discussion, although perhaps an interesting civics lesson, is an incredibly sobering thought. Having spent perhaps too much of the past two weeks absorbed in watching the hearings, I can only say that the return on Friday of “The Price is Right” on daytime television was a most welcome relief!

Love,

Rebecca