“Falsely suggesting his competitive currency has government backing, by a) being President, and b) formally anointing a non-governmental agency posing as cabinet members whose name markets the cryptocurrency in a knowingly deceptive manner.”

An impeachment of Donald J. Trump that would actually work? Congress most likely won’t pursue it. Many argue that authorities should prevent Trump from assuming office again, claiming he “incited an insurrection” on January 6, 2021. However, that claim misrepresents what actually happened on that day. Any legal argument built on this false premise will inevitably fail. If you continue to argue that January 6th was a legitimate “insurrection,” you remain stuck in a fabricated reality.

There are a series of legal arguments which should keep him from assuming office. At a minimum, this would have his entire administration surrounded by legitimate probes & stop-gaps to prevent corruption from taking root.

Unfortunately, there are currently zero people in Congress capable of or willing to take this on the right way. As a result, the responsibility will likely fall to Attorneys General, District Attorneys, and possibly US Attorneys. Additionally, private litigators may also need to step in to address what Congress refuses to tackle.

If you care, the argument laid out in this blog post would get it done.

Removing Donald Trump From Being President

Though Donald Trump has already been impeached twice, both of them were scant with evidence of actual corruption. They were largely used by both political parties as fundraising events. The news media gleefully followed every inane twist & turn in the process, advertisers spent their dollars, and the general public sat mouth-gaped or head-turned away. Accusers have leveled many claims against Trump over the years, but many were unfounded, unproven, or synthesized as fixed litigation to divert attention from other legal issues. At this point, though it may come to the dismay of his opponents, he is on course to do something truly history: financial treason.

A U.S. President owning, promoting, or profiting from a competing currency to the U.S. dollar (USD), particularly while criticizing other nations for undermining dollar dominance, could potentially demonstrate several impeachable offenses depending on the specifics of their actions. The key criteria for impeachment, as laid out in the Constitution, are “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Destroying the dollar to become unjustly enriched with a competitive currency? That’s a combination of financial treason, and a kind of bribery from Musk.

Violation of the Emoluments Clause

The Emoluments Clause of the Constitution prohibits the President from receiving any financial benefit from foreign states or from the U.S. government beyond their official salary. If a President:

• Profits from a cryptocurrency or other competitive currency that relies on favorable government policies, such as deregulation or tax incentives,
• Or indirectly benefits from international actors (e.g., foreign governments adopting the cryptocurrency they promote), this could constitute a clear violation.

The clause ensures that the President makes decisions based on the national interest, not personal enrichment.

Conflict of Interest and Breach of Fiduciary Duty

The President has a fiduciary duty to the American people to act in their best interest. If they:

• Personally invest in or promote competing currencies that weaken the USD or introduce economic instability,
• Or create a perception of undermining the U.S. financial system for personal gain, this could be viewed as a breach of that duty.

For example, if the President promotes cryptocurrencies that benefit from U.S. dollar devaluation or policies they enact while publicly claiming to support USD stability, they are engaging in a serious conflict of interest.

Fraud or Misrepresentation

If the President uses their platform to:

• Falsely suggest their competitive currency has government backing,
• Or misrepresent the implications of such currencies to the public, financial markets, or allied nations, this could fall under fraud or misrepresentation. By spreading false or misleading information, they would not only harm public trust but potentially destabilize the economy.

Betrayal of National Security Interests

The global dominance of the U.S. dollar is a significant pillar of American power, both economically and geopolitically. If the President’s promotion of competing currencies:

• Aids foreign adversaries seeking to weaken the USD (e.g., China or Russia promoting de-dollarization),
• Or accelerates geopolitical instability by encouraging alternatives to the petrodollar system, this could be framed as a betrayal of national security interests.

These actions might not qualify as treason, but they could still damage the U.S.’s strategic position.

Corruption or Self-Dealing

The President’s actions become corruption when they prioritize personal financial gain over the public good. For example:

• If the President secretly owns significant shares of a cryptocurrency and uses their position to inflate its value, they could face charges of self-dealing.
• If they design policies or exert influence that financially benefit their holdings at the expense of the national economy, this could serve as clear evidence of corrupt intent.

Therefore, World Liberty Financial commits financial treason, with $DOGE and its founding members, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, acting as co-conspirators in this conduct. Although Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are not government officials and cannot be impeached, they could face charges for bribing the President.

All of their allies in Congress, private business, and other connections both foreign and domestic – are all potentially liable. Holdings of DOGE may be considered a victim class as well as a perpetrator class.

Though pardons may be issued from certain vantage points, these people are not immune from scrutiny or consequences from the American public.

The People’s Right To Impeachment As A Weapon

The principle of popular sovereignty underpins the U.S. Constitution. The ultimate authority rests with the people, who delegate power to the government to serve their collective interests. While the 10th Amendment itself does not explicitly grant the people the authority to construct an impeachment process independent of Congress, it reserves all powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people. This creates a framework for extraordinary action when the existing constitutional mechanisms fail due to systemic corruption.

In other words, if the entire Congress is too corrupt or stupid to be the necessary check & balance against the executive branch, they must be checked by the people. And we cannot wait for an election in a few years. It has to happen now.

The 10th Amendment as a Basis for Action

The 10th Amendment states:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

• If Congress, the executive branch, and the judiciary allow systemic corruption to persist and fail to uphold checks and balances, the people retain the right to act under their reserved powers.
• The Constitution does not explicitly authorize this, but it rests on the principle that the government exists to serve the people. If the government becomes destructive to those ends, the people have the right to alter or abolish it, as stated in the Declaration of Independence.

Congressional Collusion to Destroy the Dollar

1. Congress and the President collude to undermine the U.S. dollar (e.g., by investing in competitive cryptocurrencies for personal gain while sticking the public with a devalued dollar),
2. The judiciary is unable or unwilling to intervene, and
3. The mechanisms for impeachment are compromised due to Congress’s complicity, then this would indeed constitute a betrayal of public trust and a failure of the constitutional system.

Such actions would meet the threshold of a constitutional crisis, and the people would need to take extraordinary measures to restore governance and accountability.

Grounds for an Emergent Solution

The scenario would likely require a new, emergent solution, as existing constitutional processes would be inadequate:

• The People’s Right to Redress Grievances:
  • The First Amendment guarantees that people can petition the government for redress of grievances. When the government ignores or suppresses those grievances, the people hold the moral authority to act.
• Precedents for Popular Sovereignty:
  • The Declaration of Independence established that governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. If a government violates its fundamental purpose—protecting the rights and welfare of the people—it forfeits legitimacy.
  • While not legally binding, the Declaration provides a philosophical foundation for action when formal mechanisms fail.

Possible Emergent Solutions

Since Congress and the President are all complicit in this plot, the people must pursue several courses of action:

State-Led Constitutional Reform

• Article V Constitutional Convention:
  • Two-thirds of state legislatures can call for a constitutional convention to propose amendments, including creating new mechanisms for public impeachment or systemic reform.
  • This process bypasses Congress entirely, putting the power in the hands of state governments and, by extension, the people.

Mass Resignations and Public Pressure

• Public pressure could force corrupt officials to resign, particularly if paired with widespread protests, legal actions, and media exposure of the conspiracy.
• This approach would rely on non-violent civic action to delegitimize the complicit government.

State Nullification or Civil Action

• States could refuse to recognize the authority of corrupt federal officials, triggering a constitutional crisis that forces national reform.
• Non-violent civil action, such as nationwide protests, strikes, and boycotts, could paralyze the government and demand new elections.

Citizen-Led Electoral Reform

• The people could push for new electoral processes, such as immediate special elections, under the argument that the existing government has lost legitimacy.
• This could involve calls for an interim government, overseen by independent or state-level officials, to restore trust.

The Risks of Popular Action

While such actions could theoretically restore governance, they carry significant risks:

• Unconstitutional Precedent:
  • Any action outside established constitutional mechanisms risks undermining the rule of law.
• Potential for Violence:
  • If not carefully managed, popular uprisings could devolve into chaos or civil conflict.
• Opposition from Entrenched Powers:
  • Corrupt officials and their allies would likely resist efforts to remove them, potentially using force or propaganda to maintain control.

America’s Vacant Leadership Positions Must Be Filled

Our Congress and the President are complicit in a conspiracy to destroy the dollar. At the same time, they are protecting their own financial interests. This represents a clear betrayal of public trust so severe that existing constitutional mechanisms might be insufficient to address it. The 10th Amendment holds a power for the people to construct an impeachment process. An emergent solution is necessary, grounded in the principles of popular sovereignty and accountability. Otherwise Trump will have a second term that destroys our national interest.

However, such actions would require careful planning, broad public support, and an unwavering commitment to non-violence and constitutional reform to avoid chaos and preserve the integrity of American democracy.

I am here to lead this impeachment process. To fight for justice for the American people, against tyranny from within.