IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS: Process could be simply a formality
Friday 20 November 1998
Thanks to the Democrats' unexpectedly strong showing in the mid-term Congressional elections two weeks ago, the future of Mr Clinton's presidency is assured, and the impeachment proceedings that looked threatening only six weeks ago, now appear merely inconvenient, if not irrelevant.
Two months ago, when the report of the independent prosecutor, Kenneth Starr, was published, there was a seriousness and sadness on both sides of the political divide at the President's conduct in the Monica Lewinsky affair and a recognition of the implications. Last month, when the House judiciary committee debated whether to proceed to hearings at all, committee members made at least a nod to the historical and political context of their deliberations.
Yesterday, despite attempts by the chairman, Henry Hyde, and senior Democrats on the committee to preserve the dignity of the occasion, only the third set of impeachment hearings in US history were without either epic quality or gravitas. The high principleswere tackled only in the testimony of Mr Starr.
In his two-hour statement, Mr Starr presented the best case he could that President Clinton broke both the law of the land and his oath of office "to faithfully execute the law". But partly because of his flat delivery and partly because Americans (and their congressional representatives) have already made up their minds about Mr Clinton, his arguments barely registered.
Mr Starr's case against Mr Clinton was compelling - in some ways more compelling than the case he made in his report, where the legal issues were shrouded in layers of salacious detail about the sex scandal. His investigation, he stated yesterday, showed that the President committed perjury on numerous occasions both in his sworn deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case and in his sworn testimony in the Lewinsky case. In lying to White House staff and associates, he had "concocted false alibis that these government employees repeated to the grand jury" in the Lewinsky case.
Mr Starr may have been on more contentious legal ground when he accused Mr Clinton of deceiving the American people and misusing government privileges. But even if the perjury and obstruction of justice accusations itemised yesterday constituted the whole of Mr Starr's case, lawyers tend to agree that it would be sufficient to warrant criminal charges.
US legal analysts have written volumes recently about the distinction between impeachable and criminal offences. But the bottom line is that the removal of a president's mandate is a political, as well as judicial, process. Americans invest power in the president, and impeachment is the means by which Congress, in the name of the people, can remove that mandate.
In theory, the charges against Mr Clinton are considered by the House judiciary committee, voted on by the full House, and passed - if judged to be warranted - to the Senate for "trial". By a chance of timing, the mid-term elections preempted that process, giving the people a "voice" before their elected representatives had judged Mr Clinton on their behalf, and leaving what would have been an historic occasion, an empty shell.
- 1 Autistic teenager beaten up by bullies makes them watch 20-minute video about autism
- 3 World learns of app that shows you who unfriended you on Facebook, app promptly crashes
- 4 Chris Moyles reportedly set to make radio comeback with new breakfast show on XFM
- 5 The Greece debt crisis explained in less than 100 words
Florida man sentenced to two-and-a-half years for having sex on the beach in front of a child
Autistic teenager beaten up by bullies makes them watch 20-minute video about autism
Man who was struck and killed by lightning in Brecon Beacons 'was carrying a selfie stick'
Greece debt crisis as it happened: EU chiefs at loggerheads hours before Alexis Tsipras’s last ditch deal proposals
Florida teacher sentenced to 22 years in prison for sexually abusing three pupils
More Britons believe that multiculturalism makes the country worse - not better, says poll
Osborne to cap family benefits at £23,000 – announced ahead of his post-election Budget
Nathan Collier: Montana man inspired by same-sex marriage ruling requests right to wed two wives
Forget little green men – aliens will look like humans, says Cambridge University evolution expert
Girl, 7, stares down hate preacher at Ohio festival with pro-LGBT rainbow flag gesture
Sickness and disability benefits could be reduced by £30 a week as part of £12bn welfare cuts
£23000 - £27000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A Business Analyst is required ...
£16000 - £23000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: To succeed, you will need to ha...
£8 per hour: Recruitment Genius: This is an opportunity to join an award winni...
£7 - £9 per hour: Recruitment Genius: Are you outgoing? Do you want to work in...