By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources (www.originalsourcs.com)
November 1, 2000
Yesterday Bill Clinton accused Esquire Magazine of not telling him the truth about an interview he did with them. . "I was promised faithfully that that interview would be done, released after the election, and I believed it."
Did I miss something? I thought we had been convinced by the Clinton's spin team, the media in 1998 and 1999 and Alan Dershowitz, a criminal law professor at the prestigious Harvard Law Schools for 35 years that EVERYONE lies. Dershowitz in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee that maintained that police "routinely" lied to the court and that "lying under oath is so prevalent, in spite of the damage it does to our system of justice, this president (Bill Clinton) should not be held accountable."
If, as Dershowitz said, it is so prevalent in our society that the President of the United States should not be expected to suffer any penalty for perjuring himself in a Grand Jury hearing, why would that very same president be surprised and annoyed if Esquire Magazine lied about when the interview would be released?
Apparently Clinton did not want the American public to know what he said in that interview, or to see the disgusting cover photo of him, sitting on a stool, hands on his knees, legs apart and the camera focused on his groin before the election. It is a photo true to the Esquire mission of sexual titillation, concentrating on the view of the President that Monica Lewinsky would be most familiar with. It's a photograph that's not apt to improve the trust in Bill Clinton's vice president.
However, true to his total inability to be embarrassed, the president had the unmitigated gall to say, in answer to the comment "the Republicans want to make the (current presidential) campaign about you:"
"Well, they can't---for two reasons. One is, unlike them, I have apologized to the American people for what I did wrong…most people know that what they did was not about morality or truth or the law, it was about politics and power and didn't have anything to do with them or their welfare; it had to do with the Republicans and their welfare. …It was never very complicated…They never apologized to the country for impeachment, and they never apologized for all the things they've done."So what they tried to do at their (Republican) convention was to have it both ways. They tried to get the people to keep beating up on me for something that the American people had put behind them. But folks, I think, know that they haven't necessarily put their abuse of power behind them. And so they have to be very careful about how they handle this, because the American people, they say, Look, that's over ---this is about him and his family, and that's behind us."
Not long ago I had the opportunity to read the manuscript of a book, written by Claudia Cannon, wife of House Impeachment Manager Rep. Chris Cannon, mother of eight, entitled "Battle for the Soul of America: The Rule of Law VS. The Privilege of Power." In the book's first chapter she addresses the question "What was it About?" She begins:
"Really, we were all too busy for an impeachment trial. Like other Americans, I was also busy. As a mother with children, there was plenty to keep tract of - soccer games, piano lessons, chores, homework. And the economy was good. How much easier just to forget about it and get on with life."Nevertheless, as the wife of Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah), one of the 13 House managers who prosecuted the President, I had a rare perspective of the proceedings. Like most Americans, I was unable to sit uninterrupted in front of C-Spahn for a complete coverage of the events. Unlike most Americans, I got a daily update on what had happened from my husband who called me from Washington, D.C. When I had questions, he answered them. But I was fortunate. Most people had to rely on the spin the media fed the public, and some simply gave up trying to figure it out.
"Nevertheless, even with semi-unlimited access, after watching the evening news or listening to the President's high-priced defense, I sometimes found myself thinking, maybe this was "just abou sex" and what were we doing in impeachment proceedings anyway? I'm sure even the House managers had moments of panic. But what is the truth?
"The truth is that the impeachment process grew out of actions by the President's own Attorney General who dete4rmined there was sufficient evidence to proceed with an investigation into whether had had attempted to interfere with a witness. That investigation revealed overwhelming evidence that the President had committed felonies. In the process, he encouraged others to break the law. Based on these actions, the Constitution prescribed the impeachment process as the only political actiuon the American people could take to address the President's crimes and enable him to stand before a court of law after removal from office.
"The truth is the House managers were not following a political vendetta, as many have proposed, but were filling an obligation mandated by the Constitution and required by their oath of office. These individuals made significant personal and political sacrifices to do their duty and are still facing opposition well after the trial has concluded.
"The truth is that even though most Americans seemed unaware of it, on this President's watch, our country's security has been tragically compromised and undermined by a presidency more concerned with raising campaign money than protecting our national interests. But these were serious issues that kept slipping out of sight.
"The truth is, our attitudes towards the impeachment process and the issues of right and wrong involved are of far greater consequence than the fate of a president or 13 House managers. It is in a very real sense "a battle for the soul of America." It is a battle that continues today and will likely continue for some time. The battle is to determine whether we - our society - our country - will be governed by the rule of law as our Founding Fathers intended, or by the privilege of power - where those elected to serve us instead use their personal discretion to determine the law."
Then she quotes David Hanna, author of Leadership for the Ages who wrote:
"Personal integrity and conduct shape the institutions that shape our civilization. When a man violates so many sacred oaths - the covenant of marriage, the oath of office to defend the Constitution, the oath in court to tell nothing but the truth and the oath of a citizen to abide by the law - how can that man be trusted to uphold the lofty institution of the presidency?
There it is again. Trust. This election is about trust. As the numerous polls vie with one another each day and the candidates try to figure out what "issue" they can talk about to get the public's attention, the underlying issue seems invariably to return to trust. Who, if anyone, can the public trust? Is there ANYONE out there the people can believe? Or, is everyone lying, as Alan Dershowitz says? Was it all for Republican power, as Bill Clinton said?
Compare the words, and the feelings they convey, of Bill Clinton with those of Henry Hyde speaking to the other twelve House Managers after the "no witnesses" trial in the Senate ended:
"I have gone through it all by your side -the media condemnation, the patronizing editorials, the hate mail, the insults hurled in public, the attempts at intimidation, the death threats and even the disapproval of our colleagues, which cuts the worst."…All a Congressman ever gets to take with him when he leaves this building is the esteem of his colleagues and his constitutuents -and we have risked even that for a principle, for our duty, as we have seen it."
One week from today is the day of reckoning for those thirteen House managers, who were all targeted for defeat. The huge sums of money poured into some districts to defeat House Impeachment managers could succeed in some cases, such as in California's 27th District where Rep. James Rogan of California (http://www.jimrogan.org) faces a well-financed effort from outside the district to defeat him
Who is telling us the truth about the Clinton impeachment - Bill Clinton, who says it was all about the welfare of the Republicans who were trying to seize power and had nothing to do with the welfare of the nation or the people or, those 13 House Managers who risked everything, to do what they believed was the right thing to do. Do they really owe America an apology, or does America owe THEM an apology? Is it, as Claudia Cannon, has said, a battle for the soul of America? There are a lot of people who sense that it is.
For more information about Claudia Cannon's book "The Battle for the Soul of America" e-mail CTR Publishing, Gavin Grooms at: ggrooms@ctrpublishing.com
To comment on this analysis: mmostert@originalsources.com To find information about candidates running for office in your state, go to: http://www.originalsources.com/Candidates/statepolitics.html
To Subscribe to the Reagan Monitor, the newsletter that gives you news FACTS you can USE to make your life, and the world, better go to:
Start Your Subscription