Rants Log-in | Search Rants | Account Info

IMPEACHMENT EASEMENT

It takes a well defined easement in order to negotiate the tricky impeachment field through the House and arrive at a trial in the Senate. That is why Dennis Kucinich’s bid to impeach Dick Cheney is pretty much dead on arrival. Despite the positive exposure factor of the Cheney sins, Kucinich’s move has several flaws:

1. The House lacks the political cojones to take up impeachment at this time.
2. If he went after the other head of the snake first, Cheney might become president.
3. If he went after both heads at the same time (if that is at all possible), he would be accused of attempting to vacate the presidency in favor of Nancy Pelosi’s constitutional ascendancy thereto.
4. The lack of previous, negative, subjective, judicial opinion upon which to base any articles of impeachment.

Impeachment, as provided for in the Constitution, is nothing more than an indictment, or accusation, made against a high public official, such as a judge, cabinet member or the president. In our bicameral system, impeachment begins in the House of Representatives. If the full house approves articles of impeachment decided upon by the judicial committee, the proceedings are moved to the Senate for trial. The trial is presided over by the Chief Justice of the United States. If the subject is convicted by the Senate, the only sentence available is removal from office. If the Senate does not convict, then, no further action is taken against the subject.

During the course of U.S. history, public officials have been impeached, and some convicted. Impeachment proceedings have been lodged against only three presidents: Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln; Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. Johnson survived conviction by, I believe, only one vote. Nixon resigned before the impeachment process was completed. Bill Clinton survived Senate conviction by a healthier margin than did Johnson.

I think Kucinich’s weakest point is contained in number 4, above. The House had considerable negative court records, for both Nixon and Clinton, to use as fodder for its proceedings. One of the most salient arguments against Cheney—his failure to release the notes of meetings with oil interests—he won in the Supreme Court. The rest would be a tedious uphill battle, with no assurance of success in either chamber.