On October 11, 1991, I attended a National Coming Out Day
rally at Sproul Plaza on the University of California Berkeley campus, the
famed site of the Free Speech Movement in the early 1960s. I had previously heard
of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence but never encountered them. On the stage
stood Sister Vicious Power Hungry Bitch, one of the founders of the San Francisco based
movement that draws into question understandings of gender, sexuality and the
way religions have historically constructed them.
This day Sister Vicious Power Hungry Bitch had an important message
for me and the crowd there assembled. She said,
“Instead of calling heterosexuality ‘normal,’
call it what it really is: common.”
The Sister was raising an important point, drawing into
question the tendency of the majority to see its own experience as normative
for everyone else and thus morally correct. In truth, normal simply means
statistically prevalent. Any conjecture about its moral status is purely
subjective and often self-serving.
But this demand that we “call it what it really is” has
stuck with me all these years with an application well beyond the immediacies
of National Coming Out Day in Berkeley those many years ago. This week at the
conclusion of the sham proceeding in Washington, that question came back to me.
It is highly problematic to describe the vote of the Senate
as somehow “acquitting” Donald Trump. Acquittals come at the end of an actual
trial. The verdicts are based on the testimony of witnesses who can be
cross-examined by defendants in front of jurors who have pledged to be
impartial. The proceeding is governed by established rules of evidence and
procedure.
None of those things were true in this circus in the U.S.
Senate. So let’s call these things what they really are.
1. A Trial That Wasn’t – Sham Proceeding
As a former practicing attorney and a constitutional law
instructor, I shuddered as I watched the slow-motion train wreck that was proceeding in the Senate. Part of the problem is simply the language we use to
describe it. This was a removal proceeding, not a trial. At a bare minimum, trials
demand at least an appearance of transparency, impartiality and objectivity if
they are to be seen legitimate.
None of these things were true here. Many senators
announced up front that they did not intend to consider any of the evidence
actually presented at trial. Some were ready to vote to let the impeached
official off without any of the evidence even being heard. Jurors like these in
a real trial would have been eliminated in the process of voir dire,
jury selection.
In the end, these Senators demonstrated that they never intended
to be jurors; they were aiders and abettors.
Trials require verdicts to be rendered based upon competent
evidence presented by witnesses and relevant physical and documentary evidence.
In this case, it wasn’t that the
evidence wasn’t available. It’s that it was never allowed to be heard, initially
by the stonewalling of an administration who refused to honor subpoenas to produce
relevant evidence and also forbade public servants from testifying. The administration
was, in turn, aided and abetted by a judiciary now stacked with Federal Society
ideologues more than willing to delay rulings on such evidence production. This
allowed them to avoid having to blatantly tip their partisan hands in rendering
foregone conclusions in their rulings.
This circus may have been a lot of things, but it wasn’t a
trial. Those of us who are lawyers know this and most of us cringed as we watched this constitutional process being prostituted to a partisan charade that
flaunted the very Constitution which created this body. All attorneys are
members of bars who must take an oath to defend, protect and preserve our
national and state constitutions. Watching this blatant dismantling of the
dreams of the Framers was like experiencing a dagger through the heart.
Students of history know this is hardly unprecedented. A
failure to hold wrongdoers accountable even in the face of horrific crimes thus
granting impunity to the malfeasants has a long history in this country. There
is a long string of Klansmen committing lynchings who were never charged with
their crimes. Worse yet, there is a history of those who were actually charged
with deadly church and home bombings who were quickly acquitted by all white
juries.
Our homegrown terrorists have far too often gotten away
with murder, quite literally.
Any proceeding that is predetermined in outcome, going
through the motions for public appearances, allowing wrong doers to benefit
from their malfeasance without any accountability, may be a lot of things but
it is not a trial. It is ultimately little more than an attempt to legitimize illegitimate
actions.
So, invoking the Sister Vicious Power Hungry Bitch imperative,
let’s just call this Senate proceeding what it really was: A Sham.
2. A Senate That Refused to Do Its Duty: Abdication
It was the hopes of the Framers that a responsible Congress
would prevent an imperial presidency from doing the very kinds of things that
Mr. Trump has done:
·
engaging in behaviors that were designed to
enrich himself at the cost of the national interest
·
allowing foreign interests to influence
domestic electoral processes
·
betraying allies in other countries in pursuit
of personal gain
·
lying to Congress and the people about all of
this
·
preventing relevant evidence from being
discovered.
These are precisely the kinds of behaviors which prompted
the Framers to create the provisions for impeachment and removal. And they are
precisely the actions which this Senate, whom the Framers left with that
responsibility, refused to consider.
There is one exception to this sweeping condemnation of a Senate
so fearful of this demagogue that its majority party refused to even consider
his misdeeds. Senator Mitt Romney, a Republican representing Utah, offered a
moving speech that reminded me a good bit of his father. George Romney was one
of the last respectable Republicans to sit in the Congress and one of my heroes
as a child. In announcing his vote, Mitt spoke of his faith and his moral
compass. And then he became the first member of an impeached President’s party
to ever vote against his party leader in a removal proceeding.
It does my heart good to know there are still Senators willing
to take action based upon ethical considerations rather than expediency. And it
is particularly gratifying to see that not every Republican is willing to cower
to the hegemony of Trumpland’s money machine. Mitt Romney has come a long way
from his condescending statements about “the 48%” and boxing up his family dog
in the luggage rack atop his car and driving cross country. Even white boys of
privilege have the potential of maturing into responsible adults.
Somehow, I sense that George Romney is smiling this day
over the performance of his son.
Sadly, Mitt is a glaring exception. The remainder of his
fellow Republicans were more than willing to sell out the Congress, the
American people and empower the very imperial presidency that the Framers
feared and several generations of their predecessors have fought. It was a
shameful performance from a body that has sadly come to be predictable in such
shameful behaviors.
So, invoking the Sister Vicious Power Hungry Bitch imperative,
let’s just call this performance what it really was: Abdication.
3. A Frightening But Predictable Outcome: Impunity
Given that this proceeding was not a trial, either
functionally (the Senate is empowered to remove impeached presidents, thus it
is a removal procedure) or actually (see No. 1 above), calling the result an
acquittal is highly problematic. It suggests that the impeached official here
was found not guilty. That does not correspond with the facts of this
proceeding.
Even some of the cowardly Republican who abdicated their
duties to the Congress, the Constitution and the people were willing to admit
the President had engaged in wrongful actions. It was clear from the very
wording of the Constitution that this was precisely the kinds of behaviors the
Framers sought to prevent. But in an age when there is no Truth and any appeals
to the same evokes the adolescent response of “That’s just your opinion,” the
majority of Senators avoided their duties by deferring to the logical fallacy
of appeal to opinion: “In my opinion this is not what high crimes and
misdemeanors means.”
In all fairness, it does not help that this charge is not
spelled out in the Constitution itself. Like many aspects of our founding
documents (“…all men are created equal,” “equal protection of the law,” “Due
Process of the law…”) the overarching principles that the Framers and their
successors sought to instill were intentionally vague, designed to be
interpreted contextually as they were invoked and evolved over the ensuing
years.
But the many examples of the Trump dynasty enriching itself
at the public till, not the least of which was the required quartering of
military personnel in Trump hotels overseas, are precisely the kinds of
behaviors the emoluments clause was designed to prevent. The prohibition
against the role of any foreign interests in the national electoral process applies
directly to the blackmailing of foreign officials to create dirt on a political
opponent back home. And the blanket stonewalling of officials and documentary evidence
that has marked Trumpland since its inception is precisely the kind of behaviors
prohibitions on obstruction of justice are designed to prevent.
Donald Trump was guilty of all of those things. Everyone
knows it. But in the end, those charged with responding to impeachable behaviors
chose political expedience and raw power over justice.
It was a sad day, even for Trumpland.
When a Senate is unwilling to do its duties to remove officials
they know to be guilty of behaviors which violate the Constitution, whatever
the reason, this marks a very dangerous turning point in a constitutional republic.
It sends a very clear message to wrongdoers from the lynchers and bombers of
the Jim Crow South to the money grubbers of Trumpland that they can engage in
their wrongful, harmful behaviors without any accountability.
The predictable result of such a message is that such behaviors
will likely increase.
This was not an acquittal. There was no real trial, no impartial
jury. In this sham proceeding with decision-makers willing to abdicate to power
and political gain, there could be no acquittal. What happened here was that a
wrongdoer was simply given a pass. And we can be assured that he will see this
as a greenlight to engage in such wrongful behaviors in the future.
So, invoking the Sister Vicious Power Hungry Bitch imperative,
let’s just call the result of this sham proceeding what it really was: A
Granting of Impunity.
So What Next, Trumpland?
The America which existed prior to its devolution into
Trumpland was always an imperfect democratic republic. Its imperfections were judged by its own constitutional ideals. But with the rise of Trumpland,
this experiment in self-governance that always saw its very best as merely a
step toward “a more perfect union,” is over. If there were ever any doubts
that it has finally given up the ghost, those doubts were removed Wednesday,
February 5, 2020 on the auction floor of what was once an august body.
What comes next is unclear. The devolution of America into Trumpland
has the actual majority within this country - which has never supported Donald
Trump - worried. We increasingly find ourselves barred from power in the stacked deck that now includes all three branches of government. Our
hopes of undoing the harm and repairing the damage becomes increasingly
difficult and farther and farther away. Even if it begins in the next election,
the recovery process will not occur overnight, no matter how much we well-trained
consumers believe ourselves entitled to instant gratification.
Even those possibilities were mortally wounded by the
Senate’s granting of impunity to an electoral cheater. The chances of a fair
election have diminished greatly as a result.
In granting this impunity, Senators bought into the cynical
words of his self-promoting lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, who echoed another corrupt
president who left power to avoid impeachment and removal. Those were the days when Senates still remained accountable to the Constitution and the people. Richard Nixon had
asserted that anything the President does, regardless of its legality or moral
depravity, is legal. Forty three years after a responsible Congress refused to
buy that self-serving argument, a cowardly Senate has given a corrupt businessman
with a long history of cheating in his dealings with others, hiding his records and lying to anyone
who would listen a green light to proceed with his depraved business unimpeded.
That includes the coming election.
Impunity.
It is hard for many of us to watch the country we once
loved, served and sought to require to live into its own ideals of creating “a
more perfect union,” descend down the slippery slope to utter depravity. If
there is any consolation this day, it is that brave souls like Sister Vicious
Power Hungry Bitch will continue their demands on their countrywomen and men
that we be honest with ourselves and each other and that courageous souls like
Mitt Romney will continue to hear that call to honesty and accountability and
respond.
For the rest of us, little remains but to watch, weep and
hope to begin the long road to recover in November. Truth be told, I’m not sure
the Trumpland disaster has bottomed out yet. My guess is that there is more
suffering to come before things turn around. I admit I’m not very optimistic. And
yet I remain hopeful.
Refusing to Hate, Resisting the Depravity
To those who read these words and nod your heads
affirmingly, know you are not alone. It’s true that misery likes company. You’ve
got mine. And to those who refuse to consider (or even read) these words
because the truth that a Sister of Perpetual Indulgence requires of you is too
much to handle, I will work diligently toward respecting your person even as I will
oppose your thoughts, words and deeds at every juncture.
Most importantly know that I absolutely refuse to hate you. You should
not confuse opposition to ideas, words and behaviors one finds harmful with
being a “hater.” To do so is sloppy thinking and engages an adolescent behavior that
does not merit respect. You’re capable of better.
As Sister Helen Prejean has taught us, no one is reducible
to the worst thing they ever did, even being enablers of the depravity of Trumpland.
But please know I and many others will resist that depravity every chance I
get. On that you can depend.
May the America which once commanded the respect of the
world, which merited our loyalty and gave rise to our most fervent hopes rest
in peace. And may this dark night of the soul that is Trumpland go the way of the
dinosaurs very quickly.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Harry Scott Coverston
Orlando, Florida
If the unexamined life is not worth
living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is
not worth holding. Most things worth considering do not come in sound bites.
For what does G-d require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your G-d?
(Micah 6:8, Hebrew Scriptures)
Do not be daunted by the enormity
of the world's grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly now. You are
not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it. - Rabbi Rami
Shapiro, Wisdom of the Jewish Sages (1993)
© Harry Coverston, 2020
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment