|
|
Neal M.Sher
A Day of Infamy and Shame
(JWR http://www.jewishworldreview.com) ---- ORDINARILY, THIS IS A SLOW TIME OF YEAR in the nation’s capitol. Members of Congress are back home and folks here are pre-occupied with holiday parties, bonuses, shopping and the like. But this is no ordinary time. Instead of enjoying an end of the year breather, we have been assaulted by a surreal soap opera, foisted upon us by the majority party in the House of Representatives.
The country has been forced by Republican leaders to endure an unseemly debate about what they tell us are the great moral and ethical issues of the day. Not about health care( so what if over 40 million people lack insurance), nor education (who cares if vast numbers of our graduates lack the most basic of skills), nor how to deal with the homeless living in the shadows of the Hill. Instead, we have witnessed the invocation of one of the most drastic political acts contemplated by the Constitution - the impeachment of a duly (and twice) elected President.
Not for bribery, corruption or treason. But because he lied about an extra-marital affair. I explain here the obvious not because any reader needs to be reminded of the genesis of this tragedy, but because I have to keep reminding myself that this is really happening, that it’s not just a bad dream.
I watched in utter disbelief and felt sick to my stomach as one small minded politician after another rose to pontificate as to why he or she had no choice other than to impeach the President for having committed "high crimes and misdemeanors."
They can dress it up any way they want, but we all know what lies at the heart of the impeachment allegations: consensual acts among adults. Nor is there any question that Mr. Clinton - for the same reasons most people lie about affairs - tried to conceal the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. And, in the process may have committed perjury (although, as many prosecutors quite correctly have said, perjury convictions can be very tough to come by, especially under these circumstances).
The Republican leaders - who are serving essentially as prosecutors in the House - would have us believe that the Constitution somehow obligated them to vote for impeachment once they concluded that the President lied under oath. In effect, they insist that they had no choice but to impeach, much like the traffic cop who comes across an expired parking meter: duty requires that a ticket be written. That’s as phony an argument as any I’ve heard in my 27 years in Washington.
While all criminal laws are written seemingly to "require" prosecution whenever the law is broken, anyone who has ever served as a prosecutor will tell you that, day in and day out, they are called upon to use their discretion in deciding which cases will be pursued and which will be declined. It’s the fundamental nature of law enforcement. Prosecutors must routinely balance equities to determine which cases merit the expenditure of time, personnel and resources. And which should not go forward for the sake of an overriding public interest.
It would be the rare (and irresponsible) prosecutor who would even contemplate, let alone become obsessive in, pursuing any citizen for this type of alleged perjury based on a deposition in a civil case. To do so against a sitting President is nothing short of insanity.
But this is exactly what the Republicans in the House and their $40 million dollar supplicant Ken Starr have done. In the process, they have given the back of the hand to the clear will of the overwhelming majority of Americans who have repeatedly made it clear that they are not in favor impeachment. Americans are not stupid. They have said time and again that to reject and condemn the President’s behavior is not tantamount to calling for his removal. I have to believe that most people in this country are fed up with the ugly and divisive partisan politics. People around the world are no longer laughing at us; they are bewildered at our self-destruction.
Perhaps the most revolting aspect of this coup - disingenuously camouflaged as a Constitutional imperative - is the sheer hypocrisy with which it is being conducted. Consider, if you will, some among the cast of characters who have been waging the jihad against the President, while claiming to hold the legal and moral high ground.
Dan "I had a child out of wedlock, lied about it on federal forms and to the public, but it’s purely a private matter" Burton.
Henry " I had a longtime affair while I was in my mid-forties, ruined the life of my lover’s husband, but hell, it was a just youthful indiscretion" Hyde.
Bob "so what if I had at least 6 affairs while in Congress, didn’t tell my colleagues about it when I fought for the Speakership, came clean only to stay one step ahead of being outed in the press, at least I was man enough to resign and, besides, I got a standing ovation from my fellow impeachers" Livingston.
[By the way, the pro-Israel community should shed no tears over Livingston’s departure. As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, he instinctively called for the suspension of aid to Israel because officials there had the audacity to insist on following their laws before extraditing a teenager accused of murder in Maryland].
Tom " Bob Livingston might have repeatedly broken his vows, deceived and embarrassed those who supported him, but he is the greatest American hero I know" Delay.
But the best of the bunch has to be the gentleman from Georgia, Bob Barr. He’s a real piece of work. This former federal prosecutor, considered by many to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the NRA, has relentlessly beat the drums for impeachment on all the talk shows and to anyone with a microphone. Mr. Hyde, by the way, has appointed him to be one of the floor managers (a prosecutor of sorts) for the impeachment trial.
It seems that last June, Mr. Barr was able to break away from his otherwise full-time position of Grand Protector of the Constitution, to deliver a keynote speech to a bunch of good old boys known as the Council of Conservative Citizens. Seems that these fellas have no use for anyone who’s not lily white. Clearly, they thought Bob Barr was their kind of a guy.
When Alan Dershowitz exposed the connection, Barr went on the attack and publicly claimed to have been in the dark about the groups views or philosophy. The problem for Barr is that not only do these racists have a web site proudly extolling what they stand for, their leaders insist that Barr knew full well the nature of the beast he had embraced. They even provided him with a copy of their hate mongering magazine before he gave his speech.
One has to wonder how Mr. Barr would have fared had he been questioned under oath about his involvement with a white supremacy group? Or, for that matter, how Messrs. Burton, Hyde or Livingston would have done with a full time zealot of a prosecutor breathing down their necks for years poking into private matters.
One of the striking images in this depressing saga was the comparison of the words and behavior of Mr. Barr with those of his fellow Congressman from Georgia, John Lewis. A genuine American hero and a man of principle, Lewis marched, was jailed, and shed blood with Martin Luther King, Jr. I should also point out that he has stood shoulder to shoulder with the Jewish community on issues we care deeply about, including support for Israel.
When John Lewis speaks of the rule of law and the sanctity of the
Constitution, he does so with such conviction and authority that he
cannot be ignored. Sadly, his powerful and eloquent plea against
impeachment fell on deaf ears. The House had the opportunity to place
its moral compass in the hands of a man of compassion, dignity and
understanding who can accept those who are less than perfect. Instead,
they chose to follow the other Congressman from Georgia, a man who is
the very antithesis of everything the noble Mr. Lewis stands for. For
me, that said it
8/20/98:Spielberg’s special gift to me
6/22/98: Sweep the Holocaust Museum clean
5/20/98: The Case of Dinko Sakic: A Whitewash In The Making?
4/5/98: Judge Gilbert Merritt's Obsession With Jews (Demjanjuk, part II)
3/22/98: The Continuing Saga of Ivan Demjanjuk
3/1/98: Shameful Scapegoating At The Holocaust Museum
