|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America : Starr
Investigation
The US impeachment hearing
What a socialist would have said
By Martin McLaughlin
24 November 1998
What if a member of the Socialist Equality Party had been
given five minutes to address Mr. Starr at last week's impeachment
hearing? This is what he or she might have said:
Mr. Starr, you've had more than enough time to explain your
side of the case. Since I'm limited to only a few minutes, I won't
waste any time asking you questions. I would simply like to explain
to the American people what is really behind the impeachment drive
against the Clinton White House.
It is an attempt by ultra-right and Christian fundamentalist
groups, using a trumped-up sex scandal, to replace Clinton with
a government that would go even further in attacking working people
and the poor, enriching the multimillionaires, undermining basic
democratic rights and launching military actions throughout the
world.
Mr. Starr, if you and your political friends can't get along
with Clinton even with his right-wing record, you must have something
truly barbaric in mind for the American people. Perhaps like your
cheerleaders at the Wall Street Journal you would like
to turn back the clock an entire century to the days of robber
baron capitalism, without any government social programs, without
any restrictions on corporate business, without any protection
for workers or consumers, without civil rights for minorities,
women or gays.
The investigation you've been conducting is not simply about
sex, although you and the media seem obsessed with the subject.
In your illegal leaking of grand jury testimony and your treatment
of Monica Lewinsky and others, we've seen your attitude toward
the "rule of law." Your definition of "criminal
behavior" includes any measures a person takes to defend
himself against your inquisition. There is a name for the type
of country the US would be if you or people like you were running
it. It's called a police state.
You say you are not a man of politics. Who are you trying to
fool? You're a conservative Republican with many ties to the religious
right. You submitted your 450-page report, filled with salacious
details about Clinton's sex life, barely two months before the
election. The plan was to engineer a Republican landslide and
insure Clinton's impeachment and removal from office.
Not "a man of politics?" Your entire history, your
connections and your course of action prove otherwise. But you've
never made your political agenda clear to the American public.
You've hidden behind your position as independent counsel. By
the way, of all the words I would use to describe you, "independent"
is the last that comes to mind.
Your career has depended on your connection to a network of
right-wing lawyers, judges and politicians. You moved from the
Reagan Justice Department to a seat on the Appeals Court, then
to a top position in the Bush administration, as Solicitor General.
A right-wing North Carolina Republican and former aide to Jesse
Helms, David Sentelle, fired Robert Fiske and appointed you independent
counsel. The right-wing Supreme Court, through its ruling on the
Paula Jones suit, made it possible for you to use quasi-legal
means to attack the White House.
You've had the closest ties to the Jones case, funded by the
far right, since its beginning. You discussed writing a brief
in support of Jones, at the request of a group financed by billionaire
Richard Mellon Scaife and headed by the wife of Laurence Silberman--another
right-wing Republican who sits on the same Appeals Court as Sentelle.
These are the circles you travel in: wealthy men and women with
a contempt for the vast majority of the American people and for
democratic principles.
These connections are the dirty secret of political life in
this country. They are well-known in official Washington, but
no one on this committee will discuss them. They want to continue
pretending that the judicial system is "above politics."
In the fall of 1997 the Paula Jones suit and your investigation
came together. Monica Lewinsky's affair with Clinton, and tape
recordings made by Linda Tripp, became known by people close to
you and Jones's lawyers. Tripp manipulated Lewinsky into discussions
and actions the purpose of which was to set Clinton up by asking
him questions so embarrassing that he was bound to lie.
What was your exact role in setting this up? When did you begin
to direct the activities of Linda Tripp, and coordinate your investigation
with the Paula Jones suit? These are questions worth looking into,
but the broad outlines of this campaign are clear. This investigation
is an attempt by the extreme right to accomplish by the methods
of backroom conspiracy and frame-up what they haven't been able
to carry out through elections.
Your operation was cleverly planned. But there was one thing
you could not contrive--the thoughts and feelings of the American
people. They have largely seen through you. They don't know everything
about you, thanks to the media, but they've seen enough to be
suspicious. They smell a rat.
Your investigation has disgusted millions. They think you're
prying into something that's none of your business. They have
no interest in Clinton's sex life. They think you're a peeping
Tom, a snoop. And, instinctively, they associate you with the
politicians in Washington, like Newt Gingrich, whose policies
of budget-cutting and handing everything over to the rich are
more and more unpopular.
And the American public can spot a phony. You go on about seeking
the truth, but you're on the payroll of the giant tobacco companies,
some of the worst liars in corporate America. These people have
denied for years that smoking causes illness, while they raked
in profits at the expense of untold human suffering and death.
You make a small fortune working as a hired gun for big tobacco.
The Republicans on this committee have extolled the great sacrifices
you've made, without mentioning that during your time as independent
counsel, you've been earning more than a million dollars a year
defending Brown & Williamson, United Airlines, General Motors,
Hughes Aircraft, Bell Atlantic and other corporate giants. The
Republicans and Democrats on this committee have no problem with
that, but I do.
As a socialist I recognize that Clinton, like you, is a servant
of big business who defends an inherently unjust and unequal economic
system. But I'm not indifferent to how Clinton is removed and
by whom. If the political coup which you have spearheaded were
to succeed, it would be an enormous blow to the democratic rights
of working people.
As the Democrats have once again demonstrated at today's session,
they don't and can't expose the political agenda of the right
wing. They themselves have moved so far to the right, they largely
share that agenda. I believe that the working people of this country
need a new party, a socialist party, that would represent a genuine
alternative.
Such a party would oppose everything you stand for--the defense
of privilege, social inequality, political reaction. It would
fight for the radical transformation of society so that economic
life would be controlled by the vast majority. That is the path
of human progress.
See Also:
The US impeachment hearing:
Testimony exposes elements of a political conspiracy
[24 November 1998]
The House Judiciary Committee: a portrait
of the American political establishment
[24 November 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |