Analysis: The point isn’t to punish the president, experts told lawmakers Wednesday, but to protect the country from further damage.

WASHINGTON — There’s no question that President Donald Trump violated the Constitution’s limits on his power or that the House should respond by impeaching him, three legal scholars told the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.

That’s exactly what majority Democrats were hoping to hear, and it’s the testimony they will cite as the House moves toward drafting articles of impeachment against Trump based on his solicitation of Ukraine to launch investigations with political implications in the U.S. and possibly other matters.

“How we respond will determine the character of our democracy for generations,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a member of the Judiciary Committee, said.

Ultimately, three of the witnesses portrayed Trump as abusing the powers of his office for personal gain — and in contravention of U.S. interests — in ways envisioned by the founding fathers when they gave Congress the authority to remove the chief executive. The reason to impeach Trump isn’t to punish him, law professors Pamela Karlan of Stanford, Noah Feldman of Harvard and Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina said, but to prevent further damage. Read more

Read also: Hillary Clinton talks about her sexuality in wide-ranging Howard Stern interview: ‘Contrary to what you might hear, I actually like men’

Analysis: The point isn’t to punish the president, experts told lawmakers Wednesday, but to protect the country from further damage.

Analysis: The point isn’t to punish the president, experts told lawmakers Wednesday, but to protect the country from further damage.

Analysis: The point isn’t to punish the president, experts told lawmakers Wednesday, but to protect the country from further damage.

Analysis: The point isn’t to punish the president, experts told lawmakers Wednesday, but to protect the country from further damage.