Time: Tue Mar 25 18:23:22 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA28831; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:37:38 -0700 (MST) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA05723; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:37:20 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 17:56:46 -0800 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: SNET: The "I" word (fwd) <snip> > >The "I" word > >By Phil Brennan > >The "I" word has finally been uttered on Capitol Hill. > >It wasn't much more than a whisper, a more or less timid -- and premature >-- suggestion that the House Judiciary Committee undertake hearings >possibly leading to impeachment proceedings of the First Felon. > >But in the near future, perhaps the very near future, that whisper is due >to grow into a cacophony that will drown out everything else in >Washington. > >The American people are on the verge of experiencing exactly what we >warned before the November election would inevitably follow if Slick >Willie was re-elected -- a constitutional crisis of massive proportions. > >The word out of both Little Rock and Washington is the "I" word -- >Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr is said to be on the verge of dumping a >few tons of damning evidence against the First Felon into the laps of the >House Judiciary Committee -- and Starr is said to have amassed a >thoroughly convincing case that Slick Willie has been a very bad boy >indeed. > >As we wrote a couple of weeks ago, a president accused of crimes can't be >indicted since the Constitution provides another remedy: impeachment! > >A president accused of crimes -- "High crimes and Misdemeanors" in the >elegant language of the Constitution -- first faces something that >resembles a grand jury proceeding. But in this case, the body hearing the >charges against the president is not a panel of jurors, but instead the >entire membership of the House Committee on the Judiciary. > >If, in the judgment of a majority of committee members the charges are >valid, a bill of impeachment is voted out of the committee and presented >to the entire House of Representatives. If a majority of the House vote >to impeach, a trial is then held in the Senate. A guilty verdict there >requires the removal of the President from office. > >Two Presidents have been impeached in our long history. President Andrew >Johnson was tried and found not guilty by the Senate. Richard Nixon bowed >to the inevitable and resigned before he could be tried. In both cases, >the procedure moved along about as smoothly as a matter of this gravity >can move, and in the aftermath the nation simply got back down to >everyday business. There was no real constitutional crisis. Just Jerry >Ford's "Long national nightmare" from which the nation awoke with little >more than a slight hangover. > >That will not be the case this time around. We face a genuine >constitutional crisis and it will be a doozy! > >It will be a doozy because, unlike the Nixon case where the GOP members >of Congress abandoned partisanship and acted in the best interests of the >nation in supporting the impeachment resolution once his guilt became >apparent, the Democrats can be expected to do everything in their power >to block impeachment of Slick Willie no matter how strong and shocking a >case is brought against him. > >Congressional Democrats know from past experience that a party whose >president has been impeached and disgraced will suffer grievous harm in >the next elections. What happened to the hapless GOP in the congressional >and presidential elections that followed the Watergate case is an object >lesson not lost on the Democrat leadership. > >The impeachment of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton will decimate the >Democrat ranks in both the House and Senate. Their political lives are at >stake and they know it. > >Cornered rates will always fight back. > >So will cornered Democrats. > >We can expect to see a series of parliamentary maneuvers designed to >delay and obstruct the impeachment proceedings. Every charge and every >piece of evidence no matter how compelling will be challenged, or even >worse, simply ignored, in their frenzy to save their political lives. > >Where their political future is concerned, the national interest be >damned. Staying in office is all that matters. > >They, and their horde of media allies will dismiss the whole thing as >nothing more than a partisan attack by GOP forces bent on starving old >people and children and therefor determined to crucify the one man who >stands between them and victory in their war against the poor and >disadvantaged. > >Clinton will not go quietly. > >And the business of the nation will grind to a halt. The American people >will be at each other's throats as his foes demand Slick Willie's scalp >and his deluded army of mesmerized followers spring to the defense of the >indefensible, just as they did when they voted for a man they admitted >they did not trust. > >Cry havoc and loose the dogs of war. > >To subscribe to c-news, send the message SUBSCRIBE C-NEWS, or the message >UNSUBSCRIBE C-NEWS to unsubscribe, to majordomo@world.std.com. Contact >owner-c-news@world.std.com if you have questions >Warm Regards, > >Nancy > <snip> ======================================================================== Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this ========================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail