Deep Thoughts

I mentioned in an earlier post that my standard for what I'd consider an impeachable offense for the president has dropped -- it used to be something like being caught passing nuclear launch codes, but now, thanks to the actions of our current president, it's less. That got me to thinking a little bit about what it would take for me to say that yes, the president should be impeached.

Let me point out something that I usually get wrong unless I stop to think about it: impeachment doesn't mean 'kick out of office'. It means 'charge', as in 'charge a public official with some sort of misconduct'. It implies that the misconduct is substantial; something that resulted in grievous harm to the organization or function that the public official represented. The US Constitution says that “the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Impeachment doesn't mean conviction -- it means bringing up on charges. Conviction is not automatic, nor should it be.

So what would be the grounds for impeaching the president? Well, treason, certainly, but I don't think that anyone except, perhaps, the most rabid Bush-haters would call him a traitor. Similarly, he probably hasn't bribed anyone, either (at least, not in the criminal sense. I suspect that presidents have bribed others with favors and appointments for years.) That leaves 'high crimes and misdemeanors." The Infoplease site puts it this way:

"(T)he ocean of wrongdoing encompassed by the Constitution's stipulation of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is vast. Abuse of power and serious misconduct in office fit this category, but one act that is definitely not grounds for impeachment is partisan discord."

In other words, you can't impeach the president just because you don't like what he's doing, or how he's doing it. It has to be serious, and injurious to the people of this country, and to the very nature of what makes this country unique. That he's pushed tax cuts far beyond what I consider defensible isn't a good reason; that he has a scheming, arrogant Vice President isn't a reason (and might actually be a reason not to impeach). His fondness for 'faith-based' initiatives doesn't do it (there are good reasons for wanting them to work, and they do; its just that they're prone to act in ways that favor faith-driven people to the detriment of those who aren't). His refusal to accept the word of scientists on global warming doesn't do it, either; he may honestly consider it pseudo-science. His insistence on prolonging the war in Iraq, even with a growing number of people opposed to it, doesn't do it. His preference to rely on friends and supporters for high positions isn't new to politics, and his appointment or attempted appointment of cronies and under-qualified personnel (Brown for FEMA, Miers for the Supreme Court) doesn't do it, either. Even the reprehensible spying programs, coupled with the attitude that only he and his close advisers have the right to know what is happening, doesn't quite do it, though it comes close.

But torture? Elimination of habeus corpus if you're deemed an enemy combatant? That does it, to my mind. When we are willing to torture someone because our cause is just; when we are willing to lock someone up without trial because we know in our hearts that they're evil -- those do it for me. Those injure the heart and soul of the country. Somewhat less heinous, but still detrimental to the nation we say we are: presidential signing statements (the ones that say 'I get to say if this law applies to me.')

I am willing to believe that some, perhaps many, maybe even all of the people affected directly by torture and by imprisonment under these programs are evil, vicious people who make pedophiles look like saints and Stalin look like Mother Theresa. But when we sink to that level to seize, interrogate, and inter them -- when we have a president who considers himself to be the ultimate authority as to whether a law applies to him -- then I think we are in danger, ourselves of having a sea change in what we consider to be right, and proper, and fair. We're in danger of losing our identity, of what it means to be an American.

Impeach him. Pose the questions -- do we want to be the kind of country that tortures, that imprisons without trial; do we want to let the president be the ultimate arbiter about whether a law applies to him. Let the House draw up the bill of charges, with full hearing to all sides of the arguments, and let the Senate vote on it. And even if, perish the thought, it results in the succession of the Vice President, it would be worth doing, just to get the questions into the open, to have them judged in what would be essentially a court of law.

Thats the American way.