Then, GOP was quick to impeach. Now, not so much.
Evidence continues to mount that — as a businessman, candidate and president — Donald Trump might have committed multiple criminal acts. So far, the most concrete case involves $280,000 in hush-money payments to two former paramours shortly before the 2016 election in possible violation of campaign finance laws.
But a good many of today’s congressional Republicans, including dozens who rushed to impeach President Bill Clinton two decades ago for lying about sex, would sooner jump off a cliff than consider Trump’s rising legal jeopardy. Others are abettors in Trump’s deplorable attacks on law enforcement or enablers of his erratic behavior.
In a recent Fox News interview, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., shrugged off accusations that Trump directed the hush-money payments: “He’s always under siege. He is saying this one minute and that the next. It’s what he does that matters.” Twenty years ago, as a House impeachment manager, Graham sung a different tune: “Let it be said that any president who cheats our institutions shall be impeached.”
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, was even more cavalier about Trump’s conduct. “I don’t care,” he told CNN. “All I can say is he’s doing a good job as president.” Hatch, who later dialed back his remarks, voted in 1999 to remove Clinton from office. “This great nation can tolerate a president who makes mistakes,” he said at the time. “But it cannot tolerate one who makes a mistake and then breaks the law to cover it up.”
While we’ll reserve judgment about whether Trump should be subject to impeachment proceedings until the conclusion of investigations by special counsel Robert Mueller and others, many GOP lawmakers who supported Clinton’s removal are busy making excuses for Trump or avoiding comment. We approached several longtime members of each chamber about writing an opposing view to this editorial. All declined or did not respond.
Twenty years ago, they weren’t so reticent. Through much of 1998, House Republicans could not wait to take up the impeachment of a president they had long loathed and who had been caught in an affair with a White House intern 27 years his junior.
When the disturbing particulars of this dalliance failed to dent Clinton’s public approval numbers, Republicans made the case for honesty and legality.
“What is on trial here is the truth and the rule of law,” said Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., one of three House impeachment managers still serving.
Clinton had lied about his affair to the American people. He had lied about it to his Cabinet. He had lied about it in a civil deposition. But much of this was deemed insufficient for impeachment, or was rejected by the House. So the case, as sent to the Senate, focused on curious charges of obstruction of justice and grand jury perjury.
The grand jury is where Clinton, surrounded by a growing body of evidence, finally fessed up, admitting that he’d had “inappropriate, intimate contact” with intern Monica Lewinsky. This perjury claim, developed first by independent counsel Kenneth Starr (with the assistance of a young Brett Kavanaugh), centered on some opinions Clinton had aired during the testi- mony — including that he could publicly deny having sexual relations if sexual intercourse was not involved and that he managed to deceive without lying in his civil deposition. These answers probably would not have been brought as a perjury case in a court of law, but to a Republican House and Senate they were good enough.
When the new Congress convenes next month, it will include 29 Republican members who voted on the perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Clinton. All but one — Sen. Susan Collins of Maine — voted to impeach or convict, depending on which chamber they served in at the time.
So quick they were on the trigger back then. So eager to head for the hills today.