First impeachment of Donald Trump

Based on Wikipedia: First impeachment of Donald Trump

Less than two hours. That's how long it took after President Donald Trump hung up the phone with Ukraine's president before a senior budget official quietly told the Pentagon to keep withholding military aid from the country. The phone call that preceded that order would eventually lead to Trump becoming only the third president in American history to be impeached—and the first to face impeachment twice.

A Phone Call That Changed Everything

On July 25, 2019, Trump called Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the newly elected president of Ukraine. What was said on that call would become the subject of intense scrutiny, congressional testimony, and ultimately, articles of impeachment.

According to a non-verbatim transcript released by the White House itself, Trump asked Zelenskyy to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter. He also pushed a conspiracy theory about a Democratic National Committee server supposedly hidden in Ukraine. Throughout the conversation, Trump repeatedly urged the Ukrainian leader to work with his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and Attorney General William Barr on these matters.

This wasn't just idle chatter between world leaders. The United States had approved four hundred million dollars in military aid for Ukraine—money the country desperately needed to defend itself against Russian aggression in its eastern territories. That aid had been frozen. And multiple witnesses would later testify that they understood a clear message: Ukraine wouldn't get the money, or a coveted White House meeting for its new president, unless Zelenskyy publicly announced investigations that would benefit Trump politically.

The Whistleblower

None of this might have come to light without an anonymous government employee who filed a formal complaint in August 2019. The whistleblower raised concerns that the president was using his official powers to solicit foreign interference in the upcoming 2020 presidential election.

The complaint set off a chain of events that would consume Washington for months. By mid-September, the scandal had burst into public view. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who had long resisted calls from her own party to pursue impeachment, announced on September 24 that six House committees would begin a formal impeachment inquiry.

"The president must be held accountable," Pelosi declared. "No one is above the law."

What Is Impeachment, Exactly?

Impeachment is often misunderstood. It doesn't mean removal from office. Think of it more like an indictment in criminal law—a formal accusation that triggers a trial.

Under the United States Constitution, the House of Representatives has the sole power to impeach a president. If a majority of the House votes to adopt articles of impeachment, the president has been impeached. The matter then moves to the Senate, which holds a trial. Conviction requires a two-thirds supermajority—sixty-seven senators if all one hundred are voting. Only then can a president be removed from office.

Before Trump, only two presidents had ever been impeached: Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Neither was convicted by the Senate. Richard Nixon, facing near-certain impeachment over the Watergate scandal, resigned before the full House could vote.

The Investigation Unfolds

Through October and November 2019, congressional committees deposed witness after witness. The testimony painted a consistent picture.

Bill Taylor, the top American diplomat in Ukraine, told investigators he was informed that military aid and a White House meeting were both conditioned on Zelenskyy making a public announcement about investigating the Bidens and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.

Gordon Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union, was even more direct. He testified that he worked with Giuliani at Trump's "express direction" to arrange what amounted to a quid pro quo—Latin for "something for something"—with Ukraine.

The White House, for its part, refused to cooperate. In a letter from White House counsel Pat Cipollone to Speaker Pelosi, the administration announced it would not participate in the investigation. The reasons given included concerns that the full House hadn't yet voted to authorize the inquiry and that witness interviews were being conducted behind closed doors.

Then came a remarkable moment of candor. Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, asked by a reporter about the quid pro quo, responded: "We do that all the time with foreign policy. Get over it."

He walked back the comment hours later, insisting there had been "absolutely no quid pro quo." But the damage was done. The clip would be played countless times.

The Public Hearings

In November, the House Intelligence Committee held public hearings that Americans could watch in real time. Witness after witness appeared under oath and on camera.

Marie Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine who had been abruptly recalled from her post, testified about a "concerted campaign" against her. Alexander Vindman, a decorated Army lieutenant colonel on the National Security Council, described his alarm at hearing the Trump-Zelenskyy call. Fiona Hill, who had served as the top Russia expert on the National Security Council until August 2019, delivered perhaps the most memorable rebuke.

Hill criticized Republicans for promoting what she called a "fictional narrative" that Ukraine, rather than Russia, had interfered in the 2016 election. This theory, she testified, had been planted by Russian intelligence and played directly into Moscow's hands. "This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves," she said.

Two Articles of Impeachment

On December 3, the House Intelligence Committee voted along party lines to adopt its final report and send it to the Judiciary Committee. The report concluded that Trump had solicited foreign interference for his personal political benefit, conditioning official acts on Ukraine announcing investigations into his domestic political opponent.

Republicans released their own counter-report, arguing the evidence didn't support the accusations. "The Democrats are trying to impeach a duly elected President based on the accusations and assumptions of unelected bureaucrats who disagreed with President Trump's policy initiatives and processes," their executive summary stated.

The Judiciary Committee held its own hearings, including an academic discussion featuring constitutional law professors debating what constitutes an impeachable offense. Three professors called by Democrats argued Trump's conduct met the bar. Jonathan Turley, called by Republicans, argued against impeachment, citing insufficient evidence—though observers noted this contradicted his testimony from 1998, when he had supported impeaching President Clinton.

On December 10, Democrats announced two articles of impeachment:

• Abuse of power—for pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rival
• Obstruction of Congress—for directing his administration to defy subpoenas and refuse to provide documents and testimony

Some had expected a third article concerning obstruction of justice related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. That charge was ultimately left out.

The House Votes

On December 18, 2019, the full House of Representatives voted. The tally was largely along party lines. Article one, abuse of power, passed 230 to 197. Article two, obstruction of Congress, passed 229 to 198.

Donald Trump was now impeached—only the third president in American history to earn that distinction, and the first to be impeached without a single member of his own party voting in favor.

Speaker Pelosi struck a somber tone. "I could not be prouder or more inspired by the moral courage of the House Democrats," she said. "We never asked one of them how they were going to vote. We never whipped this vote." But she also called it "a sad day for America."

The Senate Trial

The articles of impeachment were transmitted to the Senate in late January 2020, triggering a trial with Chief Justice John Roberts presiding. The format was contentious from the start.

Democrats pushed to subpoena witnesses and documents. Republicans, who held a 53-47 majority, rejected those attempts. The trial would proceed without new testimony or evidence—a sharp departure from the Clinton impeachment trial, which had included witness depositions.

The question before senators was straightforward: did the president's conduct warrant removal from office? On February 5, 2020, they gave their answer.

On the abuse of power charge, the vote was 52 to acquit, 48 to convict. On obstruction of Congress, it was 53 to acquit, 47 to convict. Neither count came close to the sixty-seven votes required for conviction.

One surprise: Mitt Romney of Utah became the only Republican to vote for conviction on the abuse of power article. "Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine," Romney said on the Senate floor. He voted to acquit on the obstruction charge.

Trump was acquitted. He would remain in office.

The Long Road to December 2019

The Ukraine scandal didn't emerge from nowhere. Democratic representatives Al Green and Brad Sherman had first introduced impeachment measures against Trump back in 2017. In December of that year, an impeachment resolution failed overwhelmingly, 364 to 58.

The political landscape shifted after the 2018 midterm elections, when Democrats won back control of the House. Nancy Pelosi, now Speaker again, launched multiple investigations into Trump's conduct and finances. But she remained cautious about impeachment itself, wary that a failed effort could backfire politically.

"I'm not for impeachment," Pelosi said in March 2019. "Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path."

The Ukraine scandal changed her calculation. Here was conduct that could be clearly defined, with witnesses, a phone transcript, and a paper trail. If this wasn't impeachable, what was?

A Precedent Set—and Broken

Trump's first impeachment established several precedents, though perhaps not the ones anyone expected.

He became the first president impeached entirely along party lines, with not a single member of his own party in the House voting yes. He became the first president to face an impeachment trial without witnesses being called. And Mitt Romney became the first senator in American history to vote to convict a president of his own party.

But the story didn't end there. Just over a year later, on January 6, 2021, a mob of Trump supporters stormed the United States Capitol in an attempt to stop Congress from certifying Joe Biden's electoral victory. Within a week, the House had impeached Trump again, this time for incitement of insurrection.

That second impeachment made Trump the only president in American history to be impeached twice. The Senate trial didn't occur until after he had left office, and once again, he was acquitted—though this time, seven Republicans voted to convict.

The Bigger Picture

Impeachment occupies a peculiar place in American democracy. The founders designed it as the ultimate check on executive power, a way to remove a president who commits "high crimes and misdemeanors." Yet in practice, it has never resulted in a president's removal.

Andrew Johnson survived his trial by a single vote in 1868. Bill Clinton was acquitted in 1999 by a wider margin. Trump was acquitted twice. The Constitution's demanding requirement of a two-thirds Senate majority for conviction means that in a polarized era, removal is nearly impossible unless a president loses significant support within his own party.

Some scholars argue this is working as intended—the founders wanted removal to be difficult, reserved only for the most extreme cases with broad bipartisan agreement. Others worry that impeachment has become toothless, unable to constrain presidential misconduct when partisan loyalty trumps institutional concerns.

What seems clear is that impeachment now carries less political weight than it once did. Being impeached was supposed to be a historic stain on a presidency. Yet Trump won his party's nomination again in 2024 and returned to the White House, becoming only the second president in history to serve non-consecutive terms.

The phone call with Zelenskyy, the withheld military aid, the constitutional crisis—all of it became, for many voters, simply another chapter in the ongoing drama of American politics, processed and forgotten in the relentless news cycle. Whether that represents democratic resilience or institutional decay may be a question historians are still debating decades from now.