America has just gone through it's third unsuccessful attempt to remove a President by impeachment. Why have they all failed.?

There are many reasons. America has become more polarized. We seem to be more susceptible to propaganda, more tolerant to lies, corruption, tribalism, racism, amoral and immoral behavior, and outside efforts to make us unwilling to listen to fact, unable to distinguish fact from fiction, truths from half-truths and outright lies. Many have come to believe that all our politicians are corrupt, care only for their own self-interests, and payoffs from big money.

Was this what the Founding Fathers envisioned when they created our unusual form of representative government with its remarkable Constitution? American society, politics and morality have changed in ways that the Founding Fathers did not expect. Senators are no longer chosen by state legislators but rather by popular vote with all of its advantages and foibles. The franchise has been expanded to include the unpropertied, people of color, and younger voters, all of which are good things—but with these changes also came the unexpected baggage of sexual, racial and religious prejudice.

The impeachment trial of Donald John Trump was arranged like no other trial in American history: the jury foreman consulted with the accused president and his legal team about procedures. Can you imagine any other jury foreman consulting with a murderer or rapist about what the rules of the trial will be? I can imagine a mobster trial in which jurists are so frightened of the accused and his wrath that they are paralyzed to vote as their intelligence and conscience dictate.

Or the citizens of a company town, many whom are employees of the company, who are chosen to be jurists when the CEO of the company is accused of rape, fraud, or embezzlement and then voting to convict when the CEO threatens to close the company. That's why we have change of venue for the courts. But you can't change the venue for an impeachment trial. Or can we?

Trials usually have 12 jurors, one judge, and prosecution and defense lawyers. Impeachment trials have a judge who can rule on almost nothing, 100 politicians for jurors with usually close to 50% of the members belonging to the same political party as the accused, and the jury foreman (and the accused) collaborating to make the rules for the trial.

I propose a change (hopefully not too late) to the Constitution to fix these problems. Let's change the venue for the trial, have regular court trial proceedings, and jurors who are less likely (but never completely) to be influenced by politics or tribalism.

Here is what I propose:

Move Impeachment trials from the polarized politics of Congress to the Judiciary Branch;

The Chief Justice (or three Supreme Court judges if you prefer) would still preside at the trial;

Regular trial procedures and rules would apply;

The House would still retain sole impeachment power; and several House members would still prosecute the case; the Senate would retain trial of impeached judges, but with fewer Senators tied up with the task at one time. Impeached Presidents, members of the Executive Branch, and members of Congress would be tried by judges and not other biased politicians.

If the accused is a politician, the jurors would be 12 (not 100) superior court judges picked at random by computer from a list of all federal superior court judges in the country. If the accused is a judge, the jury would be 12 Congressional Senators picked at random by a computer. You and I only get 12 jurors, why should politicians or judges get 100 who are so subject to political and monetary pressures?

In either case, most of the Legislative Branch would be free to continue with the people's business while their peers hopefully, render true justice rather than reelection politics and the tribalism that now predominates.

~ Raymond Leo Blain