BAD BOY, ROVER — YOU'VE ACTUALLY CAUGHT THE BUS!

By Edwin Cooney

Most of us understand the satisfaction a dog would get if it caught a boy on a bike. After all, almost any dog would enjoy chewing on a pant’s leg or a hunk of all American boy flesh, but what would happen if he caught a car or, especially, a bus? Dogs, especially American dogs named Rover, chase cars, trucks and even buses, you know! As I see it, that's exactly what Congressional Democrats caught back on Tuesday, September 24th when they announced that they were mounting an impeachment effort in the wake of President Trump's July 25th call to Vladimir Zelensky, the newly minted president of the Ukraine. It isn't that I think it's unfair to pick on President Trump, it's just that I think the risk of failure is too high. Almost as discouraging is the fact that if President Trump is convicted, President Michael Richard Pence will step onto center stage ready for a new president's political honeymoon — which would likely be uncomfortably close to the election day of 2020.

Then there is the history of presidential impeachment to consider. Impeachment charges were brought up against Presidents Andrew Johnson (March through May of 1868), Richard Nixon (January through August 1974), and William Jefferson Clinton (December 19th, 1998 through February 12th, 1999). Historically, the score is presidents: two, Congress: one. The Congress lost the two impeachments (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton) that went to the Senate floor, but won the struggle with Richard Nixon who resigned before the House could vote for a bill of impeachment. Thus, technically, Mr. Nixon was never impeached. True, there were only about ten or eleven senators who would have sustained Mr. Nixon instead of the 34 needed. Still, the twists and turns during impeachment hearings can be quite unpredictable — even "rather shocking" as the British might put it.

In 1868, the Republicans had majorities in both houses, yet they couldn't convict President Andrew Johnson because six Republican senators  saw danger to the structure and workability of the government as being more important than anything that would be gained by removing President Johnson from office.  After all, Johnson would be succeeded by Ulysses S. Grant on Thursday, March 4th, 1869 regardless of what Congress did. The leader of the GOP resisters was William Pitt Fessenden, a highly respected senator from Maine. However, a single senator was refusing to disclose to either side in the debate whether he'd vote guilty or not guilty. The hero who ultimately cast the vote that saved President Johnson's bacon was Senator Edmund G. Ross of Kansas — a man who both politically and personally despised Andrew Johnson. As young  Senator John F. Kennedy dramatically pointed out in his celebrated book "Profiles In Courage," as Ross voted "not guilty" that afternoon of Saturday, May 16th, 1868, he found himself looking down into his political grave. Ross's "not guilty" vote cost him both political supporters and personal friends. He was forever after persona non grata in the GOP. However, in 1885, President Grover Cleveland appointed him, as a Democrat, Governor of the New Mexico territory. He died in New Mexico territory at age 80 on Tuesday, May 7th, 1907.

The shocking or amazing twist in the Clinton impeachment is in retrospect. The charges against "Slick Willie" were obstruction of justice and perjury. The underlying issue, however, was the president's treatment of women which today might well be enough to drive him from office.  Not one of the eight women serving in "the world's most deliberative body" voted against the president. This included Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine as well as Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Barbara Mikulski, and Patty Murray. Interestingly, three GOP gentlemen, John Chafee of Rhode Island, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Thomas Jeffords of Vermont voted Clinton "not guilty" on both obstruction of justice and perjury. Two additional Republicans, Slade Gorton of Washington State and John Warner, voted "not guilty" on perjury. (Note: Edwin E. Cooney of the state of permanent confusion would have convicted "Naughty Billy" on obstruction of justice!)

Thus, several questions:

Would these eight women (only three of whom remain in the Senate) vote "not guilty” for President Trump?

How many senators of both parties could honestly say —  let alone vote for — the proposition that President Trump isn't at least as guilty as Bill Clinton when it comes to the question of the way he treats women?

Third, hasn't one United States Senator (a Democrat from Minnesota named Al Franken) already been forced from public office for a lot less than President Trump's nasties?

What concerns me the most is the possibility that should the president be acquitted in the Senate of charges of unlawfully and unconstitutionally using foreign governments for his advantage in domestic politics, the public may well be successfully manipulated into believing that the president's misbehavior during the upcoming campaign amounts to double jeopardy despite the fact that there exists no double jeopardy in political parlance. (Note: The sometimes uncomfortable truth is that no politician is innocent of much of anything these days.)

Exactly what gang of vipers lives on that bus Rover has just caught is highly uncertain. Therein lies the nature of the impeachment probe as well as the details of the president's deeds or non-deeds. Even more, wouldn't all of America trust the conclusions and judgment of the voting public over those of elected politicians?

"Rover, you bad boy! Get back in your doghouse with your Democratic chewing-bone where you belong!”

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY