Yesterday, Kim had a good piece on John Murtha’s latest stroke of genius: to use the impeachment process as “leverage” against President Bush over the Iraq war. This may come as no great surprise to people, but I think that is a very, very bad idea.
I will not question Murtha’s patriotism.
I will question his integrity. In the now-legendary Abscam sting, Murtha was not indicted. He met with the bogus Arabs, discussed how their bribe money could best be used in his district, but deferred actually accepting cash “for now.”
But I will not question his patriotism.
I will question his intelligence. Murtha, it is worth noting, was a proponent of of pulling US forces out of Iraq and redeploying them to Okinawa, where they could quickly return to the region if necessary. Murtha didn’t bother to mention that 1) the Japanese are growing more and more dissatisfied with our presence there, and wouldn’t exactly embrace a massive infusion of new forces, and B) Okinawa is practically next door to Iraq only on a celestial scale — to everyone else, it’s a third of the globe away, with China and Russia being in the way of direct transit.
But I will not question his patriotism.
I will question his judgment. Murtha was in the House during the Clinton impeachment, and as such has first-hand knowledge of what impeachment entails. The charges against Clinton were extremely specific: on August 17, 1998, Clinton had, while under oath in a federal court proceding, knowingly and willingly lied under direct questioning. Perjury is a crime, clearly spelled out in penal codes.
But I will not question his patriotism.
I will question his constitutional knowledge. Impeachment is the “nuclear option” of political power. It is the Constitutional process whereby Congress can remove other federal officials from office, without interference from the other branches. No president can veto an impeachment, no court can overrule it. The founders knew that was an incredibly potent weapon, so they installed their own fail-safes into the process. While a simple majority of the House is all that is needed to impeach, it requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict. Further, the sole penalty it can carry is removal from public office and banning from ever holding public office again. (A step neglected in the case of impeached federal judge Alcee Hastings, which would have kept him out of the House, where he proudly serves now (D-FL), alongside many of those who helped take him off the bench.)
But I will not question his patriotism.
I will question his own personal record. Murtha voted for the Authorization of Military Force In Iraq, and now says that it was a “mistake.” Murtha, like so many others in Congress, are trying frantically to distance themselves from their actions. They agreed with President Bush back then, and now are trying — desperately — to erase that inconvenient truth. The possible explanations are, at best, amusing: “I made the best judgment I could on the evidence, but my vote was an honest error. Bush deliberately made the wrong choice!” “I voted with Bush, but I was outsmarted and tricked by the chimp.” “I foolishly thought I could trust Bush, especially after the way he handled the 2000 election mess, but I was mistaken and he conned me.” Or the Hillary Clinton variation, “I know the measure said Bush could use military force, but I thought that was just a bluff.”
But I will not question his patriotism.
