By Mark Biskeborn
On 19 December 1998, the House of Representatives impeached President Bill Clinton. The investigation committee charged him with perjury and obstruction of justice. Kenneth Starr was appointed to the Office of the Independent Counsel to investigate Clinton's Whitewater land transactions, but finally brought charges against him for sexual misconduct.
The Impeachment Process
The President can be removed from office through the process of impeachment. If Congress feels that the President has committed acts of "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors" (U.S. Constitution) they can impeach him with a majority vote. Out of a total 435 congressmen, 231 are currently Republicans, 201 Democrats. An impeachment resembles a legal indictment, not a conviction, however, and not enough to remove the President from office alone.
The case then goes to the Senate. Overseen by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Senate reviews the case and votes whether or not to convict the President. If they vote in favor of conviction by a two-thirds margin, then the President is removed from office. However, this year, Republicans hold a 55-senate majority since the 2004 elections.
A Futile Investigation
Since Starr could not link Clinton to any violations related to Whitewater, he later submitted to Congress the Starr Report, which led to Clinton's impeachment on charges arising from the Monica Lewinsky scandal. (By the way, United States Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. worked for Starr during his tenure as solicitor general). With the approval of Attorney General Janet Reno, Starr expanded his investigation into Clinton's conduct.
Starr began his hounding investigation of Clinton in 1994 and the Senate acquitted him on 12 Feburary 1999. When Clinton left office at the end of his term, he enjoyed one of the highest after-term, public approval rating (60%) of any U.S. President for performing his job.
Costs of the Investigation
As they stood even prior to any formal consideration of impeachment, the costs of this lengthy and seemingly spiteful investigation merit consideration. Critics often complained about Starr’s expenditures of more than $50 million over four years, a minor part of the real cost. If the investigation were otherwise a constructive means to keep presidents on the straight and narrow, it would have justified the costs.
The massive distraction the investigation caused for the president, Congress, and the public incurs the main costs. We cannot calculate them precisely, but a close comparison suggests their magnitude. Consider what it would cost a commercial or political advertiser to purchase the same amount of public attention nationally for over four years.
This raises the question: Why did the conservatives in the Justice Department and in Congress push this rather bizarre investigation? It did make for a great smear campaign against Clinton personally as well as his Democrat party.
For the most part, history remembers Clinton as a successful president who enjoyed a list of accomplishments both domestically and internationally, not least of all, he presided over a shift from a budget deficit of around $250 billion, inherited from Bush Sr., to a budget surplus of around $523 billion from the beginning of his presidency to the end of his term.
The Court Appointed President with Bad Luck
Sure, one could argue that economic conditions fell favorably during Clinton’s relatively peaceful eight years of office. However, some economists suspect that Bush’s entry to the Presidency in 2000 may have caused a slight recession, especially when questions arose regarding the fairness and accuracy in the voting in Florida where his brother, Jebb, happened to be governor. But then, by way of a Supreme Court decision, not by election, Bush Jr. arrived in the Oval Office and now, his Iraq war places a huge burden on the economy and had stirred enough fear in the hearts of folks in the heartlands to assure him the 2004 election.
As for Bush Sr., so too for Bush Jr., slow economic conditions seem to have just fallen from the sky during the terms of both Presidents. After Bush Jr.’s sixth year in office, he presides over a shift in a budget surplus of $523 billion, from Clinton, to a budget deficit of $413 billion today which is an all time record in red. Meanwhile, the U.S. sinks deeper into a trade deficit, which last year rose to a record $617 billion.
Bush Jr. reminds us that we’re in a war time economy. He tells us in his
speeches that we wage war in Iraq because Saddam Hussein supported al-Queda. He repeats this even after the 9/11 Commission (which he attempted to call off) concluded that no connection ever existed between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. Moreover, even years after the U.S. occupies Iraq, no one has found any evidence of WMD’s (weapons of mass destruction).
We’ve already heard that the Downing Street Memo documented a briefing on July 23, 2002 which provides hard and legal evidence that Bush planned to invade Iraq months before he submitted his resolution on Iraq to the Congress and months before he and Blair asked the UN to resume its inspections for alleged WMDs. The Memo reveals that Bush had decided to overthrow Saddam Hussein by launching a war which would be justified by Saddam’s supposed development of terrorism and WMDs. The U.S. intelligence information that Bush used was fixed specifically to fit with his war plans.
The Case to Impeach G.W. Bush
Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about his sex life. Compare Clinton’s case to the current movement in Congress to impeach G.W. Bush.
Considerable evidence has emerged that Bush deceived and misled the Congress and the American people as to the basis for taking the nation into war against Iraq. Evidence has come to light that Bush manipulated intelligence so as to allege falsely that Iraq posed a national security threat to the U.S. In this case, Bush most likely committed a felony by submitting a false report to Congress on the reasons for launching a first-strike invasion of Iraq. And to add insult to injury, Bush's war in Iraq has only resulted in a drastic (four times more) increase in terrorist bombings.
Even though 89 Congressmen have requested that President Bush answers questions regarding the Downing Street Memo, the President refuses to discuss the subject.
Several attorneys specialized in international law have written that by the standards of the Nuremberg trials and international law, the war in Iraq is a crime against the people of the U.S. and against the world.
We have to apply these laws to everyone equally; otherwise we no longer abide by the rule of law. After three months since the surfacing of the Downing Street Memo (May, 2005) and other evidence that Bush has committed high crimes against the U.S., Congress has still not begun any real impeachment procedure. Congress, Democrats in particular, has become a door mat for the Bush Administration. Likewise, the corporate media no longer serves to seek out and expose the truth. Both the Congress and the mainstream media seem to fear losing their corporate sponsors.
The founders of the United States designed impeachment as a means to call to account the President and his high ministers, to bridle the Executive if he engages in excesses. It enables Congress and Senate to bring about an inquest into the conduct of public servants and to curb the President of swollen power.
Given the Republican majority in the Congress, the impeachment of the current President seems an up-hill challenge that few are willing to take on. Since Republicans hold a majority in both Houses, G. W. Bush enjoys a swollen power like that of an autocrat, a despot of circumstances. The Founding Fathers designed the U.S. Government in a way to assure a constant check and balance of power. However, with American voters fearful of terrorism, panic and hysteria seem to shake them off balance. In contrast, the U.S. soliders in Iraq represent American bravery even when caught between a rock and a hot place.
Fear and Trembling in America
Applying the law to Bush’s possible criminal actions depends mainly on the will and bravery of the American people. But until recently, the American people seem numbed into a self absorbed fear after the 9/11 attacks. If the American people supported Congressional hearings regarding Bush’s criminal activity, then and only then does impeachment and the application of the law seem possible. Democracy works only as well as its citizens are capable of keeping themselves informed, active, and brave. In the meantime, Americans express their bravery through "Support our Troops" stickers.
Recent history has shown that President Lyndon Johnson’s manipulation of the truth about the Vietnam War forced him to give up any ambition for re-election. Richard Nixon’s lies about Watergate forced him to resign from office.
By spending taxpayer’s money on military adventures, the Bush Administration has taken billions of dollars away from the people; dollars that could be put to better use in schools and other social and economic developments. More important, Bush’s war has killed tens of thousands of mostly innocent Iraqi civilians, thousands of U.S. soldiers, and squandered hundreds of billions of dollars which become the profits of a few government contracting corporations.
Under fear and trembling of terrorism, the American people have allowed the U.S. Governement to transform itself from the Republic its founders designed, and into an Imperium whose main mission aims to increase military power and supernational corporate profits through a "war on a continual and global scale," as Bush says; "Mission Accomplished." This certainly is not the America the Founding Fathers had in mind when they designed it. Is it really what we want now?
Most Americans haven't yet figured out that it's not the Middle Eastern terrorists who are the main danger to U.S. democracy but rather those in Washington who pretend to be defending our society. The latter are stealing both our money and freedom, not to mention the lives of U.S. soldiers by the thousands.
First Published: 15 AUGUST 2005
No comments:
Post a Comment