|
A Tale of Two Impeachments Pity poor Rod Blagojevich. On Thursday, January 29, the Illinois Senate, in a unanimous 59-0 vote, removed the governor from office on “abuse of power” charges. The Illinois Senate is comprised of 18 mostly down-state Republicans and 37 Democrats... 18 of them products of Chicago’s corrupt political machine, the same machine that has spawned Tony Rezko, Rahm Emanuel, and of course, Rod Blagojevich and Barack Obama,. In the House of Representatives, which is also controlled by Democrats, 70-48, at least one Chicago Democrat, Representative Milton Patterson, took pity on the governor and voted against the impeachment resolution.
So what did the governor do that so enraged his fellow Democrats? In its 69-page impeachment resolution, the House charged Blagojevich with conspiring to sell the vacant U.S. Senate seat of Barack Obama, with circumventing state hiring laws to benefit friends and political supporters, with misspending millions of dollars in tax revenue by purchasing foreign manufactured vaccines that the FDA would not approve for import, and other crimes. All pretty mild stuff when compared to Bill Clinton.
During his two terms as chief law enforcement officer of the United States, Bill Clinton perjured himself before a grand jury and in testimony before a federal judge, suborned the perjury of others, conspired with others to avoid prosecution, and attempted to influence the testimony of potential witnesses against him.
As president, he single-handedly destroyed the sanctity of the oath in the American system of justice; he destroyed the credibility of the Office of Attorney General, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation; he abused presidential pardon and clemency powers by granting pardons in exchange for contributions to the Democratic National Committee, the Clinton Presidential Library, and his wife’s New York Senate campaign, and he granted amnesty to Puerto Rican terrorists responsible for the death of American police officers.
He sold the security interest of the American people to foreign governments in exchange for cash; he rented out the Lincoln bedroom as if it were just another Motel 6; he turned the Oval Office into a seedy seduction parlor; and he taught all of our children and grandchildren that it is okay to engage in oral sex and then lie about it... even under oath. On his worst day, Rod Blagojevich could not touch that record.
Like Blagojevich, Clinton was urged by members of his own party to resign rather than face impeachment. Leading liberal newspapers, including USA Today, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Des Moines Register, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and the Detroit Free Press, joined the clamor. But, like Rod Blagojevich, Clinton clung tenaciously to power.
On December 16, 1998 the House of Representatives, voting strictly along party lines, sent two articles of impeachment to the U.S. Senate for trial. House members approved the articles on grounds of perjury before a grand jury (228 Republicans for, 206 Democrats against) and obstruction of justice (221 Republicans for, 206 Democrats and 6 Republicans against). On Thursday, January 7, 1999, all one hundred members of the United States Senate, 55 Republicans and 45 Democrats, marched to the well of the Senate. The Chief Justice of the United States, William Rehnquist, asked each of the senators, in turn, to raise their right hands and repeat the following oath:
“I solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.”
With thirteen Republicans from the House Judiciary Committee presenting the evidence against the president, the Senate trial lasted from January 7 until February 12, 1999. Then, on Friday, February 12, the senators assembled for a roll call vote... a two-thirds majority vote required for conviction. However, in spite of overwhelming evidence against the president, much of which he had publicly admitted to, Article 1, a charge of perjury, received only 45 guilty votes (all 45 Democrats and 10 Republicans voting “not guilty”). On Article 3, obstruction of justice, 50 senators (all 45 Democrats and 5 Republicans) voted “not guilty.”
With the necessary two-thirds majority not having voted to convict, the president was acquitted on both charges and would serve out the remainder of his second term. Unlike the Democratic senators in Illinois, not a single Democratic member of the U.S. Senate lived up to his or her oath, a promise to God, to “do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.”
Sorting out what it is that separates the vastly different outcomes in the two most sensational impeachment trials of the past century is not easy. Some would argue that Gov. Blagojevich had not actually committed an impeachable offense when he was removed from office, FBI wiretaps notwithstanding. Yes, Blagojevich may have sold state jobs in exchange for campaign money. But if that is to be the standard of conduct for chief executives we would have few presidents and few governors who could have successfully completed a term in office. And if exceeding one’s authority is also to be a standard, the same holds true.
However, the Clinton acquittal is a far different set of circumstances. As President of the United States, Bill Clinton was the chief law enforcement officer in the country... sworn to “faithfully execute the office of President of the United States” Clinton did not do that; he violated his oath of office and the crimes he committed... crimes that would have landed any American citizen in prison... were clearly impeachable offenses.
So the question remains, why was Bill Clinton, who was obviously guilty of impeachable offenses, acquitted of his crimes, while Rod Blagojevich, who was placed under arrest by the U.S. Attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, before a crime could be committed, was quickly impeached and removed from office? Would not the interests of justice have been better served if the U.S. Attorney had waited until Blagojevich had completed his sale of Barack Obama’s senate seat?
Was the trap sprung on Blagojevich prematurely because a much larger fish was about to swim into the net... say, Barack Obama or Rahm Emanuel? Is that what was at stake, and was Blagojevich the unlucky pawn? And if Fitzgerald had waited, how many more fish would have been caught in his net? We’ll probably never know unless Fitzgerald decides to write a tell-all book.
The Clintons and the Blagojeviches, power couples of the Democratic Party, have much in common. The former president and the ex-governor are cut out of the same bolt of cloth, ethically and morally, and nowhere in American politics can we find two more foul-mouthed first ladies... women more adept at the use of the “f-bomb” than a platoon of battle-hardened Marines.
But that’s where all similarities end. The Blagojevich trial was a
demonstration of how fickle the political winds can be and how quickly
one can be tossed “under the bus” when the stakes exceed what’s good for
the Democratic Party. The Clinton impeachment trial, on the other hand,
was a glaring example of the incompetence of Republican Senate
leadership and a shameless display of the willingness of Democrats to
put party interests ahead of God and country. |
