Salon Newsreal | The culture of prosecution

A L S O+T O D A Y

That wasn't foreplay, that was a four-poster!
By Lori Leibovich
'Don't act like a bully.' In a full-trial impeachment, the questions won't be for the squeamish
(01/08/99)
Back from the brink
By Joshua Micah Marshall
A Senate compromise on the impeachment trial ends the partisan bickering, for now
(01/08/99)

T A B L E+T A L K
Speaker Howdy Doody? What do you think of Livingston replacement Dennis Hastert? Get partisan in the Politics area of Table Talk

___________________
Search barnesandnoble.com for books about impeachment
___________________

Portrait of a political "pit bull"
By Russ Baker
Rep. Dan Burton, the powerful Indiana congressman who called President Clinton a "scumbag," has a few questions to answer about his own history of womanizing and alleged campaign finance irregularities.
(12/22/98)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

R E C E N T L Y
Impeachment diary
By Anonymous
A senior Senate aide keeps busy by dishing the dirt on dealmaking, perjury and free food
(01/07/99)
Lott's losing control
By Joshua Micah Marshall
Impeachment proceedings in the Senate could get as ugly as in the House
(01/06/99)
The man Clinton could have been
By Jeff Stein
Sen. Tom Daschle, the Democrats' point man on impeachment, is a tough negotiator who could save Clinton from himself
(01/06/99)
My dinner with Jerry
By Joan Walsh
A reporter reflects that Jerry Brown's idiot-savant approach to race may carry Oakland into a multicultural future without rancor
(01/05/99)
Letter from Havana
By Frank Smyth
Gays, Catholics and transvestites find their place in the new Cuba
(01/04/99)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Browse the
Newsreal Archives
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

spacer

The culture of prosecution
diary President Clinton is the victim of a tough-on-crime mentality that has trivialized the rights of the accused.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BY BRUCE SHAPIRO
Somewhere between Christmas Eve and New Year, I managed to spend 96 consecutive hours without uttering the words Lewinsky, impeachment or Starr. It was the first such intermission in 12 months, and as a result, the turn of the year really did seem to offer a new sense of possibility.
Until the last several days, even Washington seemed to briefly share that hope. It appeared that the Senate might tear away the degrading politics of the past year as easily as if Monica Lewinsky were just a pin-up on the 1998 calendar page. Trent Lott, despite his own job as a far-right water-carrier, seemed to have little stomach for a drawn-out impeachment trial. The compromise proposed by Sens. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., and Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., offered a face-saving way out, an opportunity for the congressional impeachment faction to take its best shot while sparing the country a long, pointless regurgitation of the Starr Report.
But with the apparent failure of the Lieberman-Gorton compromise, the Senate is now headed for some version of a full trial, with the impeachment faction once again driving the car. And the all-Monica-all-the-time media is full of speculation: How many witnesses? How will Chief Justice William Rehnquist rule? Should the whole deliberation be televised?
Each of these is the wrong question. Even whether the president will be convicted or not may be the wrong question. The only question that counts is simple: Can the trial that opens next week somehow redeem American politics and avenge "the rule of law," which the right endlessly talks about but has been busily trying to subvert?
This is not an idle question. Trials exist to determine guilt, of course; but they are also morality plays that dramatize society's deepest commitments and fears. And in recent years, televised trials have assumed ever more importance as the stand-ins for real public debate over significant issues. The Clinton impeachment trial is the endpoint of an arc that began with the O.J. Simpson trial, which became a lens through which to view racial perceptions of the justice system; an arc that has included, along the way, the Oklahoma City bombing trial, the Unabomber, the Louise Woodward "nanny killing" trial. Each touched some broader chord than the simple facts of the horrific offenses involved.
Television may be to blame for our obsession with show trials. But so are a couple of generations of national politicians, including Clinton, who've made law-and-order policy and the fast, dramatic conviction of criminal defendants front-and-center in electoral rhetoric. Trials are now the national pastime, and Clinton's impeachment is the ultimate show trial -- certainly the Trial of the Century, assuming it doesn't spill over into the 21st.
N E X T+P A G E+| Who's doing the short-circuiting?

A L S O+T O D A Y That wasn't foreplay, that was a four-poster! By Lori Leibovich 'Don't act like a bully.' In a full-trial impeachment, the questions won't be for the squeamish (01/08/99) Back from the brink By Joshua Micah Marshall A Senate compromise on the impeachment trial ends the partisan bickering, for now (01/08/99) T A B L E+T A L K Speaker Howdy Doody? What do you think of Livingston replacement Dennis Hastert? Get partisan in the Politics area of Table Talk ___________________ Search barnesandnoble.com for books about impeachment ___________________ Portrait of a political "pit bull" By Russ Baker Rep. Dan Burton, the powerful Indiana congressman who called President Clinton a "scumbag," has a few questions to answer about his own history of womanizing and alleged campaign finance irregularities. (12/22/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R E C E N T L Y Impeachment diary By Anonymous A senior Senate aide keeps busy by dishing the dirt on dealmaking, perjury and free food (01/07/99) Lott's losing control By Joshua Micah Marshall Impeachment proceedings in the Senate could get as ugly as in the House (01/06/99) The man Clinton could have been By Jeff Stein Sen. Tom Daschle, the Democrats' point man on impeachment, is a tough negotiator who could save Clinton from himself (01/06/99) My dinner with Jerry By Joan Walsh A reporter reflects that Jerry Brown's idiot-savant approach to race may carry Oakland into a multicultural future without rancor (01/05/99) Letter from Havana By Frank Smyth Gays, Catholics and transvestites find their place in the new Cuba (01/04/99) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
		The culture of prosecution President Clinton is the victim of a tough-on-crime mentality that has trivialized the rights of the accused. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BY BRUCE SHAPIRO Somewhere between Christmas Eve and New Year, I managed to spend 96 consecutive hours without uttering the words Lewinsky, impeachment or Starr. It was the first such intermission in 12 months, and as a result, the turn of the year really did seem to offer a new sense of possibility. Until the last several days, even Washington seemed to briefly share that hope. It appeared that the Senate might tear away the degrading politics of the past year as easily as if Monica Lewinsky were just a pin-up on the 1998 calendar page. Trent Lott, despite his own job as a far-right water-carrier, seemed to have little stomach for a drawn-out impeachment trial. The compromise proposed by Sens. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., and Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., offered a face-saving way out, an opportunity for the congressional impeachment faction to take its best shot while sparing the country a long, pointless regurgitation of the Starr Report. But with the apparent failure of the Lieberman-Gorton compromise, the Senate is now headed for some version of a full trial, with the impeachment faction once again driving the car. And the all-Monica-all-the-time media is full of speculation: How many witnesses? How will Chief Justice William Rehnquist rule? Should the whole deliberation be televised? Each of these is the wrong question. Even whether the president will be convicted or not may be the wrong question. The only question that counts is simple: Can the trial that opens next week somehow redeem American politics and avenge "the rule of law," which the right endlessly talks about but has been busily trying to subvert? This is not an idle question. Trials exist to determine guilt, of course; but they are also morality plays that dramatize society's deepest commitments and fears. And in recent years, televised trials have assumed ever more importance as the stand-ins for real public debate over significant issues. The Clinton impeachment trial is the endpoint of an arc that began with the O.J. Simpson trial, which became a lens through which to view racial perceptions of the justice system; an arc that has included, along the way, the Oklahoma City bombing trial, the Unabomber, the Louise Woodward "nanny killing" trial. Each touched some broader chord than the simple facts of the horrific offenses involved. Television may be to blame for our obsession with show trials. But so are a couple of generations of national politicians, including Clinton, who've made law-and-order policy and the fast, dramatic conviction of criminal defendants front-and-center in electoral rhetoric. Trials are now the national pastime, and Clinton's impeachment is the ultimate show trial -- certainly the Trial of the Century, assuming it doesn't spill over into the 21st. N E X T+P A G E+\| Who's doing the short-circuiting?