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