Salon Newsreal | A plague on all their houses

A L S O+T O D A Y

Life of the party?
By Joshua Micah Marshall
With Livingston gone, Tom DeLay runs the party
(12/19/98)
Clinton tries to carry on...and on
By Harry Jaffe
(12/19/98)
The war at home?
By Jeff Stein
There's not much the U.S. can do to prevent an Iraqi terror attack, besides watch and listen
(12/18/98)
Going through the motions
By Harry Jaffe
Patrick Kennedy and Bob Barr's offstage sparring was the only surprise of Friday's impeachment debate
(12/17/98)
The Impeachment War: What on earth is going on?
Experts, pundits and kibitzers weigh in on Washington's weirdest week
(12/17/98)
Home for Ramadan?
By Jeff Stein
Don't hold your breath: Clinton's air war isn't likely to knock out Saddam Hussein
(12/17/98)
And now, back to impeachment
By Bruce Shapiro
Republican skeptic Christopher Shays tries to explain why fence-sitting Republicans suddenly rushed to oppose the president
(12/18/98)
House of adulterers
By David Weir
Unless the GOP is able to convince voters the impeachment proceedings are based on more than disapproval of his private sexual affairs, revelations like Bob Livingston's will continue.
(12/18/98)
Rep. Bob Livingston's remarks
The text of the statement Thursday by the incoming speaker of the House
(12/18/98)

T A B L E+T A L K
Do you agree or disagree with President Clinton's decision to bomb Iraq? Join the debate in Table Talk's International Issues area

___________________
Make up your own mind about the GOP at BarnesandNoble.com
___________________

R E C E N T L Y
The few, the proud, the relieved
By Jeff Stein
President Clinton risked a revolt within the military if he pulled back from the brink with Iraq once again
(12/17/98)
Baghdad bombing: The right move, the wrong time
By Lori Leibovich
A foreign policy expert says Clinton should have struck Baghdad sooner -- and argues that U.S. sanctions should be lifted
(12/17/98)
Reaping the whirlwind
By Joshua Micah Marshall
Clinton's move against Iraq raises the stakes for both parties in the impeachment debate
(12/17/98)
The whole world is watching -- again
By Todd Gitlin
Left-wing literati turn out to block impeachment
(12/16/98)
Peace, the movie
By Daryl Lindsey
Clinton's three-day visit to the Middle East was full of symbols and photo ops, but precious little in the way of content
(12/16/98)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Browse the
Newsreal Archives
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

spacer

C O M M E N T A R Y
A plague on all their houses

ON CAPITOL HILL, PARTISAN HARD-LINERS HAVE DAMAGED THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY THEY CLAIM TO HOLD SO DEAR.

BY MURRAY WAAS | WASHINGTON -- So this is where things stand: We have a president of the United States who is unfit to hold that high office and a House of Representatives that is equally unfit to sit in judgment of that president. When the Founding Fathers formulated the idea of "co-equal" branches of government, it's doubtful this is what they had in mind.
Then we have an independent counsel who lacks any moral authority to make his case. Not to mention a press corps that has abdicated its responsibilities to explain to the American people the consequences to constitutional governance of trivializing the impeachment process as a means to conduct partisan warfare.
It is as if the various parties to this dispute are in a fast and furious competition to see who can inflict the most serious and permanent damage to the Constitution and the rule of law. And just when it seemed the debate could not sink any lower, hard-line congressional Republicans continued their assault on Clinton after the Iraq airstrikes, even as American troops were in harm's way.
The articles of impeachment adopted by the House Judiciary Committee and being considered by the full House state: "William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States."
It is hard to argue with that statement, although reasonable folks might disagree as to whether Clinton's actions are what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they considered impeachment.
But, by the same token, what would be the fate of Kenneth Starr, the House Judiciary Committee and the press if they were to be held to the same standards as Clinton and could also face impeachment?
Have they too undermined the integrity of their high offices and positions, brought disrepute to the institutions they serve and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States of America?
Before considering them, however, we should acknowledge the role President Clinton has played in his own undoing. While it is true that no other modern-day American president has endured such an organized and vindictive effort to destroy him at all costs, Clinton has played into his opponents' hands quite pathetically.
After all, his political enemies did not force him to lie under oath during his testimony in the Paula Jones case. Nor is anyone else responsible for his attempt to corruptly encourage others to lie in that civil case as well. It is Clinton who is solely responsible for denying due process to a litigant against him in a civil rights lawsuit.
By engaging in such conduct, Clinton most importantly violated the sacred oath he twice took upon taking office to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America." It is because of the majesty of his high office and his swearing to that oath that House Republicans are correct that the president should be held accountable for his actions in some way.
If Starr truly believes that the president has committed multiple felonies, the only just course is for the independent counsel to seek the return of a federal grand jury indictment against Clinton in the District of Columbia and schedule a trial for when Clinton leaves office. Whatever the result, such a trial would lead to a vindication of one of the two men, the humiliation of the other and an end to the national turmoil their actions have caused the rest of us.
N E X T+P A G E+| Henry Hyde's newfound love for the rule of law

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Become a Salon member. Click here.

A L S O+T O D A Y Life of the party? By Joshua Micah Marshall With Livingston gone, Tom DeLay runs the party (12/19/98) Clinton tries to carry on...and on By Harry Jaffe (12/19/98) The war at home? By Jeff Stein There's not much the U.S. can do to prevent an Iraqi terror attack, besides watch and listen (12/18/98) Going through the motions By Harry Jaffe Patrick Kennedy and Bob Barr's offstage sparring was the only surprise of Friday's impeachment debate (12/17/98) The Impeachment War: What on earth is going on? Experts, pundits and kibitzers weigh in on Washington's weirdest week (12/17/98) Home for Ramadan? By Jeff Stein Don't hold your breath: Clinton's air war isn't likely to knock out Saddam Hussein (12/17/98) And now, back to impeachment By Bruce Shapiro Republican skeptic Christopher Shays tries to explain why fence-sitting Republicans suddenly rushed to oppose the president (12/18/98) House of adulterers By David Weir Unless the GOP is able to convince voters the impeachment proceedings are based on more than disapproval of his private sexual affairs, revelations like Bob Livingston's will continue. (12/18/98) Rep. Bob Livingston's remarks The text of the statement Thursday by the incoming speaker of the House (12/18/98) T A B L E+T A L K Do you agree or disagree with President Clinton's decision to bomb Iraq? Join the debate in Table Talk's International Issues area ___________________ Make up your own mind about the GOP at BarnesandNoble.com ___________________ R E C E N T L Y The few, the proud, the relieved By Jeff Stein President Clinton risked a revolt within the military if he pulled back from the brink with Iraq once again (12/17/98) Baghdad bombing: The right move, the wrong time By Lori Leibovich A foreign policy expert says Clinton should have struck Baghdad sooner -- and argues that U.S. sanctions should be lifted (12/17/98) Reaping the whirlwind By Joshua Micah Marshall Clinton's move against Iraq raises the stakes for both parties in the impeachment debate (12/17/98) The whole world is watching -- again By Todd Gitlin Left-wing literati turn out to block impeachment (12/16/98) Peace, the movie By Daryl Lindsey Clinton's three-day visit to the Middle East was full of symbols and photo ops, but precious little in the way of content (12/16/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
		C O M M E N T A R Y A plague on all their houses ON CAPITOL HILL, PARTISAN HARD-LINERS HAVE DAMAGED THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY THEY CLAIM TO HOLD SO DEAR. BY MURRAY WAAS \| WASHINGTON -- So this is where things stand: We have a president of the United States who is unfit to hold that high office and a House of Representatives that is equally unfit to sit in judgment of that president. When the Founding Fathers formulated the idea of "co-equal" branches of government, it's doubtful this is what they had in mind. Then we have an independent counsel who lacks any moral authority to make his case. Not to mention a press corps that has abdicated its responsibilities to explain to the American people the consequences to constitutional governance of trivializing the impeachment process as a means to conduct partisan warfare. It is as if the various parties to this dispute are in a fast and furious competition to see who can inflict the most serious and permanent damage to the Constitution and the rule of law. And just when it seemed the debate could not sink any lower, hard-line congressional Republicans continued their assault on Clinton after the Iraq airstrikes, even as American troops were in harm's way. The articles of impeachment adopted by the House Judiciary Committee and being considered by the full House state: "William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States." It is hard to argue with that statement, although reasonable folks might disagree as to whether Clinton's actions are what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they considered impeachment. But, by the same token, what would be the fate of Kenneth Starr, the House Judiciary Committee and the press if they were to be held to the same standards as Clinton and could also face impeachment? Have they too undermined the integrity of their high offices and positions, brought disrepute to the institutions they serve and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States of America? Before considering them, however, we should acknowledge the role President Clinton has played in his own undoing. While it is true that no other modern-day American president has endured such an organized and vindictive effort to destroy him at all costs, Clinton has played into his opponents' hands quite pathetically. After all, his political enemies did not force him to lie under oath during his testimony in the Paula Jones case. Nor is anyone else responsible for his attempt to corruptly encourage others to lie in that civil case as well. It is Clinton who is solely responsible for denying due process to a litigant against him in a civil rights lawsuit. By engaging in such conduct, Clinton most importantly violated the sacred oath he twice took upon taking office to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America." It is because of the majesty of his high office and his swearing to that oath that House Republicans are correct that the president should be held accountable for his actions in some way. If Starr truly believes that the president has committed multiple felonies, the only just course is for the independent counsel to seek the return of a federal grand jury indictment against Clinton in the District of Columbia and schedule a trial for when Clinton leaves office. Whatever the result, such a trial would lead to a vindication of one of the two men, the humiliation of the other and an end to the national turmoil their actions have caused the rest of us. N E X T+P A G E+\| Henry Hyde's newfound love for the rule of law - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Become a Salon member. Click here.