BCJ Home

 

Articles & commentary

News reporting

Petition our government

  @  6/16/04

Forum Home

 

Impeachment Forum   Book  #1

   

The Nixon-Clinton Impeachment:
A New Constitutional Theory


Chapter 1: The Nixon Clinton Impeachment Tragedy


   

First section

Section 10 of 10 sections

 

Previous

 

   

Commentary


  Go back to the previous section of this chapter...

Go back to the book index page...

 

Commentary


 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 

10-1

During the Nixon impeachment proceeding, many argued that "lying to the American people" was itself grounds for impeachment. I will argue later in this book that the Senate has the Constitutional power to try Articles of Impeachment on grounds of deceiving the American people — even if no corresponding Judicial criminal trial is possible. If President Clinton was at some point involved in staging events that lead to his actual 1998 House impeachment with the intent of doing this as a deliberate diversion — something to obstruct any effective pursuit of other Clinton scandals that appear to go directly to wide scale abuse of the office of President — such an act of "stage managing" a diversionary impeachment would itself be both impeachable, and may be a criminal obstruction of justice. The effect would be to disrupt other investigations that may have resulted in criminal charges, specifically regarding the 1996 Clinton campaign finance violations.

 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
10-2 The Nixon-Clinton Impeachment Tragedy

The Clinton Presidency has been both hard on our country, and devastating to the Clintons as a family. Many innocent people have suffered terrible consequences from the actions of the Clintons.

In the face of these facts, I want to offer four suggestions. First, obviously Bill Clinton comes from a broken home, and this must have had a bad effect on him. Second, this fact has certainly influenced Hillary Clinton, if only to be an enabler. Third, they are obviously both very talented, and may have come over time to justify the unjustifiable based on their answer to President Kennedy's challenge: what they thought they could do for the country. There are philosophical doctrines I’m sure they encountered first as students, and later in their political careers, that they probably see as justifying what they have done. Fourth, if the Clintons hadn’t been taught by the apparent conclusion of our government, our House Judiciary Committee, to think that "private wrongdoing", if not egregious, was not serious enough to prevent someone from serving as President, might none of this have happened? A higher standard set at the time of the Nixon impeachment proceeding could have been a check on the Clinton’s (and many others) behavior and actions that might have prevented all of this. At a minimum, the dangerous doctrine that ascended from the Nixon impeachment proceedings, that even criminal wrongdoing is not impeachable if it is "essentially private" and not egregious, introduced an element of tragedy into the Clinton’s personal lives, into the lives of their associates, and into our national life.

 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
10-3

Looking back on all this, it seems evident that both "family values" and "the rule of law" are far more than slogans. Let me suggest something further. There has always been a libertarian strain in our national political thought, and it seems to have recently gained strength. Could it also be that one of the lessons of this tragedy is that a legitimate purpose of "the rule of law" is to guard us, ourselves, against temptations that can lead us to become something horrible? If our House Judiciary committee, in 1973 had not taken the position that "private wrongdoing" is in some way permissible, might the Clintons themselves have been better off? We may think we know what harm they have done to our Republic. What have "We the People", or post-Watergate "We the Enablers", done to the Clintons? If you think this is far-fetched, consider this: much of the legislation that Congress passes is referred to by the semi-technical term: enabling legislation.

 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
10-4

Power corrupts. Can a Republic such as ours survive if we hold publicly the doctrine: "private wrongdoing", including criminal wrongdoing, is not a basis for impeaching and removing our President? The next two chapters present the foundation and exposition of a new Constitutional theory: if a President is impeached by the House for alleged criminal violation of a Federal statute, both the Senate and the Judiciary can independently remove the President from office.

 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
First section   Go to the next chapter chapter...

Go back to the book index page...

 

 

Previous

 
Back to top  
 

Copyright © Robert S. Carney Jr., Minneapolis, MN, 2004, All rights reserved.