Return of the Blog

Whoa, is it 2004 already? :-)

Getting serious, December just slipped out from under me (very busy month), and it was tough enough keeping up with my DMY commitment. Nevertheless, again I offer my apologies. Though I am stating for the record that the Justice Log will likely be more sporadic in the future, I will do my best to keep up on the latest from the left, and offer my observations on same, when I can (and I have more to offer than on my DMY column).

And now, a blast from the past:

Article 4       ABUSE OF POWER

The President misused and abused his office and impaired the administration of justice.

1.      The President made false and misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States;

2.      The President made false and misleading statements to members of the Cabinet and White House aides;

3.      The President frivolously asserted executive privilege;

4.      The President made perjurious, false and misleading statements to Congress (answers to 81 questions).

Clinton? Or Bush?

Then again, how on earth could anyone say that "making false and misleading public statements" to Congress, White House aides, and the American people constitutes an impeachable offense? Absurd, right? Well, not to the GOP:

Using the powers and influence of the office of President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct that resulted in misuse and abuse of his high office, impaired the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, and contravened the laws governing the integrity of the judicial and legislative branches and the truth-seeking purpose of coordinate investigative proceedings.

Whoa. strong words. So, a president who lied to Congress and the American people to started a war on false pretenses, endangered the lives of millions of New Yorkers by covering up the damage done by post-9/11 emissions, and suppressed a commission on the intelligence failures involving that same attack, will be impeached too, right?

And of course, the good old GOP will add the betrayal of Valerie Plame-Wilson to the Articles of Impeachment, I'm sure:

ARTICLE III

In his conduct while President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, and has to that end engaged personally, and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up, and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony...

Sure, some of the details are different. But the Republican party would never allow such piddling peccadilloes to interfere in the pursuit of justice. Surely, they won't resort to "definition of is" style of hair-splitting, will they?

Who are we kidding? Of course they will. Of course they have.

I could go on at length about the many other issues at stake -- Enron, employment, the environment, deficits that respected economists believe may endanger the entire global economy -- but if you're here, you probably know about all of that. So for now, I'll stick to this reminder of what used to constitute an impeachable offense...when a Democrat was in the White House.

(/) Roland X
Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you an enemy of the state.