Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (8117)	10/11/1998 2:30:00 PM
From: j g cordes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Michael.. Reply to:Jim.. what behavior would it take for you to impeach the President? There are many obvious acts that impeach without debate. For example, creating a secret army to take over nuclear strike capability, acting as an agent of a foreign country to disrupt government; acts where the intent is clearly against the American people or to subvert the process of government. Other acts of a President fall into gray areas because every President is both a citizen and a public servant. This is not to say that a President's job ends at five o'clock, it doesn't. However, we elect complex individuals into office whose private lives are rarely known even after they retire. Nor are their private lives our concern. My reading of the debate over impeachable acts tells me there is latitude, especially for actions and legal considerations outside the role of President. This is necessary to both protect the office and as much as possible assure the continuity of effectiveness for those in it. Otherwise every President would be subject to constant distraction and harrassment even if he or she were perfect. So, with your permission, I'll offer some thoughts as a lay citizen who recognizes a complex world where few things are black and white. Take these remarks in that light and no other. Let me begin with the purpose and seriousness of impeachment as I see it. On Impeachment: Impeachment ranks as high a consideration for this country as the electoral process itself, because it seeks to overthrow the will of the people expressed through popular vote. The government exists by the will of the people and while at times the people and government may disagree, the government serves us.. not the other way around. For this reason, impeachment of any President, indeed impeachment of any elected official, is not to be taken for political ends no matter the balance of representation by either party. While the electoral process is designed to thwart one party domination, it is possible on occasion to have a dominant majority. Thus there is a trust given to all elected officials to support a plurality of opinion and balance of power, which becomes even more important when one party finds itself with the potential to circumvent normal process. Partisan politics is a serious issue when taken to extreme as it violates the basic intent of our governmental system. The four year elective process, as Washington and others understood so well, stands between a people's government and a government that exists for its own purpose. Congress is elected by the people, the President is elected by the people, Congress is not the people. Finding cause to intercede in this process must, in my opinion, rise to the highest levels of national trespass.. not political desire. Congress is not the people. There is a clear separation of power in the structural process of elections, both by when they take place and and how they take place. The people elect representative to Congress for one purpose, and they vote a President for a different purpose. Four years per elected term is not a long time. Its long enough to implement change but not long enough to revoke the structural inertia inherited from previous administrations. Clinton has two years left to his term in office. These two remaining years are important not so much for what Clinton can do with them, but because they are a part of the structure protecting the people's will. All Americans, first this fall, then in two years will vote as a matter of normal electoral due process. Preempting this process for anything less than high crimes and misdemeanors is itself a serious intent to undermine our system. Therefore, because Presidents are voted into office by the will of the people, Congress and the Senate must find extreme cause to overthrow that mandate. They are not simply removing a man from office but are acting against the structure which protects the will of the people. In my opinion, the level and cause of charges currently against Clinton, do not warrant disrupting the continuity of the elective process. ..... The President Morals and Public Trust (next post)

To: greenspirit who wrote (8117)	10/11/1998 3:02:00 PM
From: j g cordes	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13994

Michael.. II Reply to: what behavior would it take for you to impeach the President? some thoughts on Morals, Privacy and Public Trust ------ Morals and Public trust: The President, while expected to, is not elected to be the moral leader. One could argue the contrary, that we expect extreme moral flexibility of our Presidents because we live in a world of immoral acts to which our national response through the President's consideration won't always be "the right thing to do." We have and will continue to act in our national interest which of necessity sometimes results in our being immoral to peoples of other nations. We commit people to death and take property in the name of self defense and eminent domain, though we call it defending our allies or enforcing our right to world resources. History finds truth has many faces when we look back on our actions. We don't, as a nation, respect all the opinions of international bodies... nor do we hold our Presidents subject to these bodies' opinions of justice. Consider Amnesty International and the United Nations, the opinions of other country's governing bodies, and religious organizations. Our 'rule of law' has varied with expediency and has never been absolute, let alone constant. Internally we continue to argue the death penalty, right to abortion, states rights, right to suicide and thousands of other considerations that live in indecision. We don't, in my opinion, elect a President to be a family man, a church attending person, a religious person or a model citizen. We can and will elect another President in due course if his behavior offends us... our rights in this respect are absolute. A President is not above the law, nor is a President beneath the law, thus every President is due the respect of a private life, no matter how his moral standards may differ from yours and mine. Indeed, protecting a President's right to privacy enforces our rights to privacy and moral self determination. We may not have friends at the end of the day, but we remain citizens in a free country. Had the framers of the constitution wanted clerics, celibates, or loyal spouses to run the government they would have provided for it. Had they wanted a litmus test of morality they would have made one. They did provide that a President could be impeached for crimes other than felonies as considered by Congress and presented to the Senate. They realized all behavior could not be predicted and that in extreme cases impeachment might be the only remedy. In my opinion, there has been considerable but perhaps not sufficient remedy. The President has had his private life exposed to international examination and embarrassment (.. an interesting word). His efforts to disguise his actions have failed and in the process left him open to civil prosecution following office. I also feel that none of these acts, currently in consideration, were taken with the intent to harm the American people and do not rise to the level of impeachment. Therefore, as I previously argued, an impeachment for this would be acting against the structure which protects the will of the people which remains on the side of the President retaining office. It is a matter of sufficient cause in the real world where any and every breach of law is not equal to the worst breach of law. In my opinion, the level and cause of charges currently against Clinton, do not warrant disrupting the continuity of the elective process. .... The problems facing this nation and the world have not diminished, indeed they've escalated while we divide ourselves. We need to get real work done. Clinton, despite his sexual pursuits and despite our escalated focus on politics and morals, can do an adequate if not better job than before until the next election.