Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson says his resolution to censure President Trump in the last 16 days of his presidency is “for the sake of posterity and history.”
A number of House Democrats already signed on to a censure resolution drafted by Johnson, stemming from Trump’s Saturday phone call urging Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to find votes in his favor.
“The point is, for the sake of posterity and history, that we express our displeasure at President Trump’s actions, his second perfect phone call, he’s trying to influence an election, the first one for himself, was through foreign interference,” Johnson told the Washington Examiner, referencing Trump’s July 25, 2019 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that House Democrats investigated and impeached him over.
“This [phone call] one through overturning the results of a domestic election that he lost, and he, in the process of that second call, just like the first call, he violated federal and state law, and it’s too late to impeach him, in my opinion, and convict him and remove him from office with only 16 days left,” Johnson argued. “But, certainly, we can go on record with our disapproval and censure of his activities on that phone call with Secretary of State Raffensperberger.”
Following Trump’s impeachment by House Democrats, Senate Republicans, who had the majority, voted to not remove him from office. Democrats running for the presidency this past cycle did not run on Trump’s impeachment. House Democrats believed that there were “stronger issues for the party to talk about.”
“We held him accountable in the House for doing what he did on the first phone call the senate let him off the hook,” Johnson said, noting he has not talked to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yet about when the censure would come to the floor for a vote.
However, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters Monday, “If that is found to have been a criminal attempt to entice, encourage, or threaten somebody to take actions, which are illegal themselves, then I think that there may well be liability on behalf of the president of the United States, which from my standpoint is not surprising.”
