Edit Page Features
Impeach
By MARK HELPRIN
Here we stand in a clearing of the most difficult century of human history,
wanting our deserved rest, and standing with us may be the most corrupt,
fraudulent and dishonest president we ever have known.
At the very least the president, before he became president, was at
the heart of criminal financial dealings and bribery involving his wife
and various felons who were his close associates. Upon his elevation to
office, he worked hard to suppress and obfuscate the details of what he
had done, while continuing in the same pattern as both he and the same
and a new set of dishonest associates hid, withheld and destroyed records,
purloined FBI files, used the IRS to intimidate opponents, plotted to cage
government business, met with drug dealers, arms traders and mobsters,
raised illegal campaign money, sold influence and shook down the Chinese.
If we tolerate crime and corruption in the belief that they are but
a small challenge to our great stores of virtue and probity, when next
we look those great stores will be gone. Although it has its own price
in damage and pain, holding the president to account would mean that future
presidents would be, if not uncorrupt, less corrupt. Anyone aspiring to
the presidency, from senators and governors to young state legislators
and attorneys general, would have great incentive to stay on the straight
and narrow.
Class of Manipulators
The consequences of letting it all pass would expand through generations
to come, altering the fundamental equations of government and the relations
of the governed and the governing. It would legitimate the most disturbing
myths and prove the most cynical accusations. If it is left to stand it
will shift power insufferably toward a class of manipulators and cheats.
We have moved in that direction before, but have always pulled back. Now
we are in danger of not pulling back.
Perhaps most frightening to the politicians in whose hands rests the
ability to remove him is the president's popularity. But the machinery
of impeachment is structured in a constitutionally miraculous fashion to
burn away the many layers of deliberate confusion laid on by the arrogant
hand of power. It can, in clarifying the facts and stating bluntly the
truth, transform the protective angels of presidential popularity into
devils of the most relentless pursuit. Those who are reluctant to hold
the president to account because he enjoys a 65% approval rating seem not
to understand that he enjoys a 65% approval rating because they are reluctant
to hold him to account.
The president's supporters who willfully sleepwalk through the stream
of charges against him feel that an attack on him is an attack on their
beliefs. They are mistaken. If he is removed from office, a president and
vice president of the same political party and persuasion will remain.
The near-impeachment and subsequent resignation of Richard Nixon did not,
except for the strange interlude of Jimmy Carter, compromise a 24-year
GOP presidential sweep. Besides, in so promiscuously adopting his opponents'
positions, this president of muddy waters has removed a great deal of meaning
from political battle and made opposition to him no longer a matter of
politics or policy but mainly a matter of decency.
As for his allies in Congress, they float on the wind like birds and
will fly with the president only as long as he travels in buoyant air.
Do not imagine that after counting the bodies thrown from the presidential
sled the likes of Ron Dellums or Sen. Bob "Miracle Baby" Torricelli
would stand by their captain even through a light drizzle.
The president shifts blame. The sad faces that have been paraded before
the camera before they quit or go to prison are the faces of people taking
a rap, voluntarily or otherwise. But a president is responsible for what
his minions do, especially when he directs them.
He shifts arguments. His adventures in fund raising become his passion
for campaign reform and then are transformed into indignation that his
political rivals have prevented him from leading the American people into
the cathedral of virtuous politics. He manages this because he may actually
believe it.
He and his apologists shift focus. They are astounded at the temerity
of critics who compare him to Richard Nixon, and they love to make their
contempt and astonishment clear. But there is an answer for them, which
is that it is indeed possible to compare the two, and that in the daily
exercise of comparison Mr. Nixon is animated in a ghostly walk toward Mount
Rushmore. At least he had shame. At least he resigned. At least Republicans,
broken-hearted though they may have been, finally stopped defending him.
This president shifts out of the way, like a bullfighter. Of his many
capes the vice president and Mrs. Clinton are the most waved in the wind.
The president's wife is, of course, inextricably tied to the mass of escalating
lies, but no matter what her crimes, sins or pretensions, she holds no
office, and is therefore unremovable from office. She is a distraction,
a diversion no less than the moon-faced underlings about to take a rap.
The vice president is even more so, having by virtue of his office and
his character great distractive potential. But though one of the distinct
pleasures of modern political life, indeed of life in general, is to observe
him as he simultaneously wounds and baffles himself,to bring the great
cannon of a Senate trial to bear upon him would be like using an elephant
gun to shoot an apple pip.
The person in question here, as from the beginning, is not Al Gore.
It is not Janet Reno. It is not Webster Hubbell, or Craig Livingstone,
or Dan Lasater. And it is not Hillary Clinton. It is no one of these or
anyone else but the president of the United States himself, in all his
power and despite all his power.
Each time a new infraction is unearthed, the president sits back, crosses
his arms, and trumpets through his surrogates, "Where's the proof,
the notarized film footage of me doing wrong? Don't you know? You can't
catch me, I'm the gingerbread man." He defines the rules of the game
and controls the initiative, which is another way of saying that what we
have here is a bunch of lawyers throwing out a lot of smoke and chaff.
But the time has come to cut through that smoke and chaff with a resolute
move that will leave all the maneuvering and obstruction in its wake.
President Nixon did not himself break into the Watergate. Nor were any
direct orders uncovered implicating him. But a nation led by a worrying
press made the appropriate connections even without judicial proof, and
the president was driven from office. A quarter of a century ago, however,
America had a general expectation of law and propriety, a press in implacable
opposition, and a president who knew the difference between right and wrong
even if he did not always observe it.
Though these are now remarkable mainly for their absence, one thing
is the same: The key congressional processes are controlled by the nonpresidential
party. Because the press is languid and the public largely indifferent,
responsibility falls on Congress. If justice is to prevail someone in Congress
will have to step out in front and take some fire. Otherwise, nothing moves.
A quarter of a century ago, the Democrats acted with anger for having lost
the presidency and surety for having won Congress. Now the Republicans
act with timidity for having lost the presidency and lack of certainty
for having won Congress. They seem to be ignorant of Nelson's Trafalgar
memorandum: "No captain can do very wrong if he places his ship alongside
that of an enemy." That is, to fight.
Why is Congress so pale in tooth and claw? Along with a great deal else
in American life, much of what goes on in Washington is treated as a game.
Only the clever get to rise, and they are proud of doing what it takes
to win, whatever that may be. To paraphrase Maynard Keynes, when people
like this are alone in a room, there is nobody there. But the difference
between life and a game is that whereas the logic of a game demands doing
what will succeed, the logic of life demands doing what is right. This
may at times be an indiscretion, but indiscretions rightly motivated are
the way history moves. Half of statesmanship is taking the somewhat blind
step that carries no assurance of success but which has about it all the
qualities of what is just.
The Republican Party and its intellectuals have been searching hard
for theme and direction. Futurism, the Contract With America, national
greatness, capital gains: These have fallen flat not only because they
are bereft of urgency but because they are as well an evasion of duty.
Politically, there can be only one visceral theme, one battle, one task.
If the party embraces it, the party will solidify. If it rejects it, it
will drift.
Subject to the Law
The task is to address the question of President William Jefferson Clinton's
fitness for office in light of the many crimes, petty and otherwise, that
surround, imbue and color his tenure. The president must be made subject
to the law.
When that moment arrives it will signify the rejection of flattery,
the rejection of intimidation, the rejection of lies, the rejection of
manipulation, the rejection of disingenuous pretense, and a revulsion for
the sordid crimes and infractions the president has brought to his office.
It will come, if it does, in one word. One word that will lift the fog
to show a field of battle clearly laid down. One word that will break the
spell. One word that will clarify and cleanse. One word that will confound
the dishonest. One word that will do justice. One word. Impeach.
Mr. Helprin, a novelist and Journal contributing
editor, is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.
|
|