ISSN 1062-7421
Vol. 9 No. 12 (December 1999) pp. 566-567.

THE IMPEACHMENT AND TRIAL OF PRESIDENT CLINTON by Merrill McLoughlin (Editor). New York: Random House, 1999. 435 pp. Paper $15.00. ISBN 0-8129-3264-1

Reviewed by Lynn Jones, Department of Political Science, Collin County Community College.

In his opening statement of the trial of President Clinton before the Senate, House Manager Ed Bryant (R-Tenn.) accused the President of "legal hairsplitting". This remarkable statement, coming, as it does, from a lawyer, does an excellent job of setting the mood for much of the testimony and argument that is to follow. From the side of the prosecution the reader will be asked to engage in a good deal of speculation based upon ambiguous testimony. The reader especially will be asked to impute motivation to the President by relying upon a loose chronology of disputed events. From the defense argument the reader must confront the distinction between "sexual relations" and "improper relations", reflect on the meaning of "is", and distinguish "perjury" from "lying" or "misleading".

The book begins with an able introduction by historian Michael R. Beschloss, who, among other things, gives the reader a short recap of the history of the special prosecutor and the Independent Counsel Act of 1978. He further poses a number of relevant questions about both the factual issues in dispute and, more importantly, the historical significance of the event. Of particular interest are questions about the impact of the impeachment and trial on the presidency. Will it weaken the presidency at least for a period of time, as did the impeachment of Andrew Johnson? Or, have our changing views of the office mooted such an inquiry? Does the public reaction suggest that we have entered an era where we view the President much as the Italians and French view Prime Ministers, i.e., if he does a good job of running the country, will we ignore most private misbehavior?

Part I of the book focuses on the inquiry of the House Judiciary Committee and includes the testimony of Kenneth Starr, debate on the question of perjury, testimony by defense witnesses, and the formulation of the articles. Part II covers the floor debate and impeachment by the House. The trial in the Senate makes up Part III. Part IV contains a number of useful appendices. Merrill McLoughlin does an admirable job of editing, including the elimination of a good deal of repetitive testimony while providing brief descriptions of what was deleted. There remains, nevertheless, much repetition. Both sides seem compelled to reiterate the same point over
and over, albeit with no clarification.

This is, of course, an immensely useful work for use in seminars on the presidency and constitutional law. It raises fundamental questions about the impeachment process and the intent of the Framers about the legitimate purposes of impeachment. For example, in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Professor Samuel Beer argued that impeachment is nothing more than the

Page 567 begins here

American equivalent of a vote of no confidence. The President's counsel, not surprisingly, argued that impeachment is valid only for an offense against the state that is threatening to the continued stable operation of government. As a reference, the work presents a number of opportunities to engage students in examining questions fundamental to our system and raises issues of civic responsibility.

*****************************************************************
Copyright 1999 by the author.