The latest attempt in our nation’s history to get rid of a president via the impeachment process ended rather quickly — in failure. The accusations against Donald Trump were so thin a copy could have been slipped under anyone’s front door.
The rabidly partisan Democrats pushing to remove the president likely made a martyr out of him, thereby gaining many new supporters for the man they obviously despise — not only politically. The ill-timed, for Democrats, State of the Union speech given during the Senate trial gave Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi a chance to demonstrate her personal venom with a stunt that hurt her far more than it hurt her opponent. Tearing up a copy of Trump’s printed speech proved that she needs another semester at a finishing school where they teach manners.
The impeachment trial continued after the Pelosi stunt with only two extremely weak charges approved by the Democrat-led House. The two, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, were lame enough to be dealt with promptly. Neither, even if based on the president’s actual deeds and conduct, were enough to have him convicted by the Senate and sent packing. That fact was known by any level-headed American. The real goal of Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, and other Democrats was to have the American people hear the word “impeachment” placed alongside the name “Trump.” But even that doesn’t look as though it will have much impact come November’s Election Day.
Impeachment appears in the U.S. Constitution to rid the government of a real criminal such as someone who consorts with an enemy, takes a bribe, and participates in a “quid pro quo” that endangers our country. It is also in the Constitution for use against a president who lies under oath. So, let’s consider the 1998 impeachment process when Democrat President Bill Clinton’s was the target.
He lied under oath, and that should have been enough to convict him. He also engaged in repeated sexual conduct with a female less than half his age — and their activity wasn’t conducted in a “hot pillow motel” but in the White House. Virtually all Americans were disgusted when they learned of his conduct with the young intern.
But his well-understood dealings with agents of communist Chinese, real or potential enemies of the United States, should have been right at the top of the list of charges against Clinton. A host of books and articles had appeared naming the Chinese operatives who shoveled money for Democrat political use while expecting favors, including transfers of militarily sensitive equipment for the Beijing government. There was a long list of the names and deeds of the Chinese who dropped off piles of money while the Clinton-led team cancelled or winked at bans on the transfer of what the Chinese really wanted — and were willing to pay for.
Some Americans will remember the names of John Huang, Johnny Chung, Charlie Trie, Maria Hsia, Ted Sioeng, Mochtar Riady, and others among the more than a hundred Chinese who fled America, invoked the Fifth Amendment, or simply refused to discuss how they had shoveled millions for use by the Democratic Party in the 1996 campaign to reelect the Clinton-Gore team. It doesn’t require a degree from some prestigious university to know what the “quid” was (the piles of money) in this quid pro quo arrangement. The Chinese wanted equipment and technology to beef up their military capability. The “quo” was the hefty amount they spent.
Consider the following train of events. From 1994 to 1998, an American named Bernard Schwartz, the CEO of Loral Corporation, arranged with his family members and company executives to funnel more than $2.4 million to the Democratic National Committee and other groups connected to the Democratic Party. Not only were such large contributions illegal, the money had come from China, whose political leaders, generals, and scientists wanted to improve their military weaponry with needed satellite equipment and directions about how to use it. Loral had what the Chinese wanted, but transferring such sensitive capability to China had been forbidden by the U.S. government.
Loral’s CEO worked with President Clinton to cancel the prohibition on sending what China wanted. Clinton arranged to shift the responsibility to bar such shipments to a different, more pliable government agency. And that agency made possible the legal transfer to China of the desired information and equipment. Bill Clinton actually saw to it that the ban on transfer of missile-launch capabilities to China got lifted. China’s millions went to Schwartz and Loral; Schwartz sent a large portion of those funds to the Democrats to help them win elections including the reelection of Clinton/Gore; and the Chinese got what they needed to improve their missile-launch capabilities.
Bill Clinton should have been impeached and tried for treason and bribery. His dalliances with Monica Lewinsky were indeed disgusting. But building up China’s missile capability, which was worse, wasn’t mentioned during the impeachment trial that did not convict Clinton of anything. The Clinton/Gore team won reelection in 1996. And when Clinton sought exoneration for his White House involvement with the young female, he got it.
Let’s hope none of the Chinese missiles ever use their enhanced capability against the United States.
John F. McManus is president emeritus of The John Birch Society.
