Breaking: Arkansas Supreme Court disqualifies term limits proposal
Today's Paper Latest stories Obits Traffic Wally Hall Newsletters Weather Puzzles + games

WANT TO amend the Constitution of the United states without actually saying so? Just do it informally--not by design but by accident. Call this addition to the Constitution's legislative, executive, and judicial branches special prosecutors, and have them launch witch hunts in all directions.

Twice now this year, the more partisan members of his own party have asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to go after the previous administration's scandal-haunted presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who lost the election but can yet win the post-election review if it continues. Which is just what a Republican congressman from Ohio, the Hon. Jim Jordan, proposes. Why? Because he says it looks like there's more than enough evidence to go after Ms. Clinton, to which the sage and prudent--and honest--attorney general of the United States replied: "'Looks like' is not enough of a basis to appoint a special counsel." For once unleashed, these special prosecutors can prove a plague upon the land, devouring everything and everyone in their sights.

Does anybody else remember Kenneth Starr and the havoc he wreaked, destroying anyone and any prudent precedent in his free-roaming way? It was great theater, perhaps, but no way to run a government except into the ground. So now these unabashed partisans would have Congress play this number once again, this time from the top with even more feeling. Please, spare all of us a replay of that jaded number. Who needs it?

Well, maybe the Hon. Donald Trump, who keeps urging the Justice Department to investigate its investigations of Ms. Clinton. But isn't this the same Donald J. Trump who is president and chief executive of the federal government? If he wants something investigated, surely he has enough tools at his disposal to investigate it himself, or have his many subordinates do so. Why hand the job off to a special investigator, further cluttering the organizational chart of the U.S. government? Isn't this where we all came in? Let's get the hook and end this song and dance now if not sooner.

It's enough to make one wonder if some of these so-called conservatives are immune to experience, which should be their constant guide, rather than theory. Demonstrating that even a blind hog can come up with an acorn now and then, a separate but equally partisan congressman across the aisle--Michigan's John Conyers--observes: "What strikes me about these comments is the president's view that the criminal justice system serves him and not the public."

And how many times must this country, faced with challenges similar to those weathered in the past, demonstrate how little it has been learned from that past, and so set up a repeat of the past's failures? Even as the after-effects of the Great Recession are still being felt, America's household debt is reaching a record high, setting the stage for one more boom sure to bust. American manufacturers are revving up their engines across the board, producing everything from bulldozers to semi-conductors to all kinds of foodstuffs. Employment is way up--for now--as factories have added 156,000 workers to their payrolls since the election of this president. It's a dramatic and undeniable turnaround from the last year of the previous administration when some 16,000 jobs were lost.

But why add a whole new branch of government to what is being manufactured from whole cloth? Enough already. Enough over-confidence and under-solid performance. For this latest boom is built on pillars of sand, much like this latest addition to the constitutional structure.

Editorial on 11/20/2017

Print Headline: Here we go again

Sponsor Content


You must be signed in to post comments
  • BoudinMan
    November 20, 2017 at 6:30 a.m.

    Jeff Sessions is honest? How many times now has he lied under oath to legislative committees? While I agree with the gist of the column, this assertion is farcical.

  • WhododueDiligence
    November 20, 2017 at 9:59 a.m.

    "Call this addition to the Constitution's legislative, executive, and judicial branches special prosecutors, and have them launch witch hunts in all directions."
    More properly we should call them special counselors since they have been appointed for nearly a century and a half (beginning in the Grant administration) and their investigations have resulted in prosecutions only when they have found significant illegal shenanigans.
    Kenneth Starr's intense partisanship made him a poor choice for independent counsel. Robert Mueller is a much better choice. And even Kenneth Starr's expensive years-long widespread witch hunt hit pay dirt when Bill Clinton gave him the Lewinsky scandal and lied about it. Clinton should have resigned. As commander-in-chief he should have given himself a bad conduct discharge for lying about it and for exposing his presidential decision-making to possible blackmail by placing himself in that predicament.
    Special counsels have been appointed by many presidents since Grant. Sometimes they discover major scandals or other illegal shenanigans and sometimes they don't. By a vote of 8-1, the Supreme Court has rejected the argument that special counsels have unconstitutional powers. Without the historical appointments of special counselors, there's no telling how many despicable and illegal political actions would have been swept under the rug, hidden from the voting public by despicable and illegal cover-ups.

  • gagewatcher
    November 20, 2017 at 5:35 p.m.

    what a joke the author of this shameful; article uses terms like "go after" Ha how about the word "investigate " if the false trump dossier was used to instigate/authorize federal wire taps on trump tower and if it was legal for then FBI director Jim Comey to not thoroughly vet the Clinton email crimes of TREASON and let us not forget her approval and coordination of selling 20 percent of our uranium to Russia. and in return getting over 100 million donated to the Clinton Foundation (slush fund). and with hubby and sexual predator Bill Clinton getting paid twice his usual speaking fee from the Russian government of half a million to go in his pocket. the American electorate is still wanting Hillary to pay for her screw up in Benghazi and the obama's messy cover-up, of that sad episode,Yes we want to see her behind bars. and the sooner the better.