councilor.org
| Source | Steve Zeltzer |
| Date | 99/05/01/22:44 |
| /* Written 12:51 AM Dec 29, 1998 by jdoug@ix.netcom.com in igc:labr.all */ /* ---------- ""Degrading Impeachment" While We Sl" ---------- */ Degrading Impeachment, While We Slide Toward A Parliamentary System? 12/22/98 By Steve Zeltzer The impeachment of President Clinton has allowed an unusual opportunity to look at the undemocratic underside of US politics. While the Congress could vote 314 to 5 for the bombing of Iraq, only a few Congress persons questioned the constitutionality of the war., Ron Paul of Texas was one of the few who asked the question. Paul, a former Libertarian turned Republican raised the point that more and more presidents have flagrantly ignored the Constitution on waging war. When President Clinton unilaterally bombed Afghanistan and Sudan, not one Democrat or Republican raised the issue of impeachment, yet this act alone under the constitution should require a challenge. Even the "independent" Socialist Congress person, Bernie Sanders voted for the Iraq bombing resolution and then called on the US government to support "democratic forces" that would "overthrow" the government of Iraq. This support for the right of the United States to overthrow governments that do not heel to it's dictates is another example of how far this country is from any "democracy". This from a Congressman who at the same time rails about the economic inequities in the United States. When it finally came to the impeachment vote, the issue of war was thrust again into the issue of the presidency only because Clinton had acted unilaterally to bomb Iraq. Almost in a unanimous vote, Congress voted to support this criminal act after the bombing. One "liberal" Congressman, John Conyers apparently voted against the resolution not because of the bombing but because it did not specifically support the man who was doing the bombing. While giving support to the massacre, it did not name the President. Dumbing Down Impeachment These same Democrats who support Clinton charged that that the Republicans were trying to "dumb down impeachment" Robert Wexler, Democrat of Florida warned "If we dumb down impeachment and make it easier for future Congresses to impeach Presidents, we will forever weaken the institution of the Presidency. The founding fathers knew this. They could have said a Presid ent could be impeached for any crime, but they chose to designate crimes only of the gravity of treason and bribery. To impeach for anything less than the highest of crimes is a distortion of the Constitution and hands a tremendous weapon to our present and future enemies, who will point to a weakened President and ultimately a weakened nation." The history of US presidents and the growing presidential powers is that the presidents and their powers have been been used, again and again to lie to the American people and continuously violate their own constitution. From the invasion of the Philippines to the "Gulf Of Tonkin" resolution passed by Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson, US presidents have used their "presidential powers" to support the "imperial interests" of US capitalism. These uninhibited actions of the US President have violated one right after another. Indeed, it would be a definite victory for workers and democratic rights to bring about a "weakened" presidency. One Congress person called the impeachment a "Republican coup d'etat.". Another, Diana De Gette of Colorado warned that "We will have substantially subverted the Constitution, which was designed to reflect the will of the people in a republic, not to pro mote a political party in what is slipping towards a parliamentary system." This danger of a "parliamentary system" warns the Democrats will take us further away from democracy. This, from a party that, aligned with the Republicans, has allowed corporations and multi-millionires and billionaires to decide who shall be candidate s and how much TV and radio time you will get when you run for office. This from a party, that has put more people in jail than almost any other country in the world. What is this this so called "People's House" that contains a majority of millionairs and corporate sycophants doing the bidding of the robber barons who rule the world. While they warn, we are "slipping toward a parliamentary system" they argue that it is quite proper for the President to violate the laws of the land as long as he is serving as president. Shiela Jackson-Lee of Texas talks about healing this nation. "How do we heal this nation? The majority must allow us to vote on a free-standing censure resolution constitutionally allowed that acknowledges that the President was morally wrong, misled the American people and that the President upon leaving office will be subject to civil and criminal penalties. To do more lays the shredding of this constitution at our feet..... Mr. President, if you can hear me, do not resign. This is not a parliamentarian form of government." Do we hear the same words for Mumia Abu Jamal who like many many others has been railroaded to prison and now faces the death penalty. There are viturall y thousands of people,who have been jailed through entrapments by Grand Juries. Clinton is not the first one to face these methods. We only have to go back to the 1960's where the police and the FBI used co-intel programs to jail and harass people in ever y corner of the US. What is so striking about the "call for fairness" by the "liberal" Democrats is that they have refused to even question the general role the Grand Juries for the rest of us. This is obviously not in their sights. For a President who has put more Black men in prison because of their race and their class, it speaks volumes of the concern that these Black Democratic politicical hacks have for "justice." The double standard that they want for the common man and women and the "rights" of the President is astounding. It is clear as well, that Clinton knows that the Grand Jury system has been always used by prosecutors to help intimidate and entrap people that they are not able to corral through the normal prosecutory process.As a lawyer and law professor, Clinton was well aware of the reason that the Federal Grand Jury had ordered him to testify. The fact, that the Starr Grand Jury was used against a President in the same manner it is used against political critics and disidents is what is so troubling to these "def enders" of the Constitution. If you or I were on the docket, they would be defending the right of the Grand Jury to be used in such a manner. It is only when it comes to the prosecution of their co-hort William Jefferson Clinton that they claim that the process is "unfair". If this exercise brings us closer to a parliamentary system so much the better. The present presidential system thwarts our democratic rights and must be challenged by all working people and those who would like to see a more democratic system. Steve Zeltzer P.O.Box 425584 San Francisco,CA 94142 united@labornet.xyz |
Copyright (c) 1998, Joongpil Cho