Does Clinton's Impeachment Inoculate Bush From Same Fate?

Posted by Richard Blair at 11:43 AM on March 7, 2007.

It's hard to believe that over 8 years have passed since a GOP-controlled kangaroo court convened, and presented articles of impeachment against President William Jefferson Clinton. Looking back on the Jones-Whitewater-Lewinsky-Tripp-Starr smudge on history, it's also hard to believe that the neocon contingent in congress was so hell bent on removing a sitting President over what was essentially a personal matter.

Without splitting the "perjury" hair, and for the purposes of this post, let's stipulate that Clinton's impeachment was clearly politically motivated (you'd have to be a dunderhead to believe otherwise anyway). But why? Certainly, the GOP leadership waged a war with the Clinton White House during his entire administration. And it wasn't even so much ideological - hell, in any other era of the country, Bill Clinton could have just as easily been a moderate Republican. He removed a lot of social welfare safety nets. Utility deregulation was allowed to occur during his administration. Enron thrived. Grandma Millie was getting hosed a long time before George W. Bush was installed as President in late 2000 by the Supreme Court. Clinton didn't serve in the military, yet he wasn't averse to projecting U.S. hegemony in the world via military engagement. In other words, Bill Clinton was a conservative's type of "liberal".

So what happened? Could it be that the entire 8 years that Clinton was in office was simply a setup for the Bush regime, and that the impeachment of Bill Clinton was little more than a sting operation by the neocons in the GOP to inoculate a future GOP president from the same fate?

With the current Democratic Party controlled congress apparently afraid to even broach the topic of impeachment (and prosecution) of the entire Bush regime for offenses which are much more clear than those of Clinton, it's at least a plausible explanation for the fervor of Newt & Co.'s pursuit of Bill Clinton from 1998 through his impeachment hearings in 1999.

Throughout the process of impeaching Clinton, it was clear that a vast majority of the public did not support the partisan proceedings, even as some scared Dem rabbits (Joe Lieberman?) publicly railed against Big Dog's personal indiscretions. While Clinton's "crime" was clearly an impeachable offense in the most technical of senses, it did not rise to the intent of high crimes and misdemeanors in office.

There are few who would argue that the lies and deception and crimes of the Bush regime and many of their GOP enablers most certainly do rise to the level of the intent of the constitutional framers in providing impeachment as an option of last resort for congress.

It is no accident that the GOP-controlled congress allowed the independent counsel statute to expire in 1999. Democrats felt burned by it, so put up little resistance. The GOP leadership might have had more nefarious reason, though - because certainly they had the votes and the horsepower to renew the legislation if they had so desired. They didn't. Let's also not forget that just prior to the presidential election in 2000, the Project for a New American Century issued its first manifesto, which was signed by all of the early members of the Bush regime - the manifesto that set in motion an irreversible path that we're still traveling.

So, now, in 2007 a case can clearly be made that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney could and should be removed from office via the impeachment option, and the crimes committed by lesser names in the regime could and should be prosecuted. Why won't congress push forward? On the face of it, the answer seems pretty simple.

The Democratic Party controlled congress does not want to be viewed as vindictive, and seeking retribution for Clinton's kangaroo court in 1999. This is exactly the setup that the GOP leadership wanted in place when they pursued Clinton's impeachment on the flimsiest of counts. While they were in power, the GOP absolutely wanted the proceedings to be perceived as partisan, because, for the most part, Americans seem to detest the concept of partisanship when it comes to the common weal.

The GOP embraced the partisanship. The Democrats now seem to be horrified by the potential for their being viewed as "partisan" if the leadership were to pursue impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. And I'm not sure why.

I am sure, however, that it bothers me. With the conviction of Scooter Libby yesterday, there is no question that high ranking members of the Bush regime were involved in, at best, leaking the name of a covert intelligence agent and, at worst, possibly committing acts of treason as political retribution. This is the cudgel that the leadership of congress must now use to pry open the bursting Pandora's Box of corruption, lies, deceit, and crimes that is being held so tightly under claims of "executive privilege" by Alberto Gonzalez and a host of White House lawyers. Libby's conviction is the lever. And perhaps AttorneyGate is the counterweight to actually move the lever and pry back the top of the lid on the box.

In writing this article, I was struck by how Attorney General Janet Reno literally bent over backwards to support Ken Starr's witchhunt of Bill Clinton. That's why I believe that AttorneyGate is the place to really start the investigations - because unlike Reno, Alberto Gonzales has provided nothing but roadblocks to justice in his role as Attorney General of the United States. That's where this whole thing has to start - with Gonzales.

It's time for the charades to end. Before the executive pardons start flying from the Bush regime, there has to be some accountability. Accountability for the current regime starts with an investigation by the House Judiciary Committee on whether or not impeachable crimes have been committed.

The GOP fully intended that the 1999 proceedings on Bill Clinton would generate a foul taste for future such efforts. And it did. But it's time to rinse and spit, and move forward with all haste. As I noted yesterday, in one remarkable day, we hit the trifecta of evidence.

There is no better time; there is no more appropriate moment in history; there is no more compelling reason to remove a regime that is demonstrably dangerous to the Constitution of the United States.

Tagged as: impeachment, george w. bush, bill clinton

Richard Blair is a Philadelphia area freelance writer, and the blogmaster of All Spin Zone.