Product Description
Shocking political corruption and conspiracy are revealedas former Arizona Governor Evan Mecham presents detailed, compellingevidence that his impeachment was orchestrated by a group ofbehind-the-scenes power brokers determined to regain control ofArizona government after Mecham made good on his pledge to takepolitical control away from special interests. Although ultimatelyacquitted of all Grand Jury indictments, Mecham suffered a politicalimpeachment and was the target of a recall petition, making him theonly officer in U.S. history to be attacked on so many fronts. This isa disturbing insiders look at how special interests controlgovernment and pushed an innocent man out of office. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

Good Biography, but remember who is writing it.
Overall the book is interesting and written in a very readable style, much like the man himself. I was a teenager in Arizona when Evan Mecham was governor then not governor. I went to High School with one of his granddaughters.
Gov. Mecham portrays himself in a very pure and holy light, which may or may not be true.He does lay a very convincing populist arguement that he as man of the people was ousted by the powers that be.Populism in American History has a long and storied tradition from Jefferson to Jackson and onward.
Ronald Watkins'High Crimes and Misdeamors offers an opposing and exact opposite view of Mecham's account so reading both is a very interesting excercise. Reality is probably some where in the middle.
From my perspective Gov. Mecham did some things that while not illegal or neccesarily unethical they looked bad politically or at least were made to look bad politically therefore he was taken out.One problem was that Mecham portrayed himself in a high minded way. Well, you do that and anything you do that is not PERFECT (like forgetting to include a loan from someone) can be made to look bad, even if it in reality wasn't.
That's the reason that currently the idiot hate-Bush crowd is so mad about Bush and domestic spying. Bush portrays himself as very high minded, so when he does something that doesn't look above board it's GOTCHA TIME.Clinton enacted domestic spying as well. Why no press or societal discussion of it??We all expect dirty, low down, criminal behavior from Clinton so we don't talk about it.Mecham is the same way. A high minded well intentioned indiviudal who didn't play the game, and was was unable to be PERFECT, because he's a human being, so the GOTCHA GAME was played and he lost.

Written by Ev?
Interesting but probably somewhat fictional account of the actual events.Ev was never this eloquent or perceptive in public (who wrote this book?, in fact it was an absolute embarassment to see him try to explain his position on the news shows), and while he may have been a good administrator (also not a hallmark of Arizona politics) poorly considered public remarks spooked too many special interest groups that started the engine that brought him down.If you take the fictional approach this is a fun Citizen Kane/consipracy/paranoia type novel.

State Politics at Its Worst
The story of how a corrupt political machine supported by a captured press railroaded an independent governor out of office. Of special interest isthe demonstration in this book that the impeachment process is not reallyabout guilt or innocence. It is about exerting political muscle.

GovernorMecham's and my politics are at opposite poles and I began reading thisbook with a strong bias against him; I came away, however, with fullsupport for his position and a deeply distressed view of Arizonapolitics.

Here is a good lesson for those who believe that local andstate politics are better than national politics.

An honest man with a message of truth that needs to be heard
Evan Mecham has done a superlative job in spelling out whatreally happened in Arizona in 1987-1988, as well as the years leadingup to that tumultuous period. Having only been in Arizona for the past three years, I had no idea as to the complexness of the political situation in Arizona.Governor Mecham is so much more than the two sentence blurbs most of the country knows him by. Ev is a feeling, compassionate and dedicated statesman, whose only "mistakes" in office was standing up to the behind the scenes money brokers who pull the strings on the politicians who will do what money wants them to, while the population as a whole suffers. Governor Mecham committed no crimes, performed nothing even hinting of animpropriety, and fought hard for the taxpayers, cut taxes and spending, andbegin mobilizing a to be effective drug fighting program.This book isan excellent read, and anyone who wants to read the truth about GovernorMecham, and the disgusting behind the scenes actions done by big money inArizona (similar activities are going on in every other state aswell), andwho wants to be inspired by the persistence of a man who was a prisoner ofwar to the nazis in world war II, a successful businessman, newspaperpublisher, and state senator; on to fighting for everyone while Governor -being maimed, maligned, and raked over the coals all the while - shouldread this book.I highly recommend the book Wrongful Impeachment. Readit, for as it has been said, "the truth shall set you free", aswill the knowledge and information this book shares.

A great read with a powerful message
Thanks for your appearance on Let's Talk. A great show!Wrongful Impeachment should be required reading for all elected officials at all levels of government. A great read with a powerful message. ... Read more

Amazon.com Review
At the end of the 1700s, Tennessee Senator William Blountbecame the first person in the United States to be impeached. Congressfirst expelled, then impeached the legislator for plotting withEngland to wrest control of Florida from Spain. In The FirstImpeachment, Buckner F. Melton considers William Blount's lifeand his case's impact on future impeachment proceedings. Melton alsoputs Blount's crime in context by describing other expansionistintrigues in the old Southwest during that period. These were theyears right before the Louisiana Purchase, when "West" meant theMississippi River region. At the time, Spain claimed Florida,Louisiana, and the land west of the Mississippi River. William Blountwas a land speculator who regularly used his political position toexpand his wealth. Blount hoped to enrich himself even more bygetting rid of Spanish rule in the West and in Florida. When theUnited States government wouldn't send money and armed forces to helphim, he turned to England. Even though England turned him down,Congress deemed conspiring with a foreign government a crime, an actthat was not in the best interest of his country.

Because Blount's case occurred only 10 years after the creation of theU.S. Constitution, many questions about the impeachment process had tobe worked out during the course of his trial. Among the questionsCongress struggled with were: Who can be impeached? Who should run theimpeachment trial? How can Congress ensure that impeachment will notbe used as a partisan tool? Although Melton's writing style is a bitdry, the story of William Blount should be of interest to legalscholars and people who'd like to learn more about intrigue on theearly frontier. --Jill Marquis ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Solid Research on Impeachment
For those who want to know the history of impeachment, this is the book to read.Melton (who also wrote a book about the Burr Conspiracy -- which as a Burr buff, I didn't much like) did a tremendous amount of research in congressional archives and other obscure sources to bring to the reader the story of the first impeachment.Through that story, Melton illustrates the meaning and limitations of the impeachment procedures.He shows that impeachment is not identical to regular legal processes, but neither is it solely a political event.It is a combination of the two: both a political decision by the House of Representatives (which votes whether to impeach or not) and the Senate (which decides whether to try the impeached official or not), and a process that contains some legal processes and others quasi-legal (adapted to the uniqueness of impeachment itself).

Beyond Melton's objectives, the book also, perhaps unwittingly, shows how different things are now than they were back when the first impeachment took place (1798).For me, this is the real benefit of history -- and to be successful in educating people, this requires the historian to go into great depth and detail, bringing out each moment (almost like a novelist draws out those elements in his characters and their life situations).Melton does this beautifully in this book.

Well worth the read if you want to understand how far down the road away from our democratic beginnings we have come and what impeachment really is about.

Jennifer Van Bergen, author of "Archetypes for Writers" and "The Twilight of Democracy."

A well-researched book on Congress's first impeachment
"Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye! William Blount, late Senatorfrom the State of Tennessee, come forward and answer the Articles ofImpeachment exhibited against you by the House of Representatives." With these words spoken on December 17, 1798, by the sergeant-in-arms, the Senate commenced impeachment proceedings against William Blount. His was the first impeachment by Congress of a public official. Blount's offense was his involvement in a scheme to encourage revolution in the western states of 1796, which included western Tennessee and lands south. The scheme would have encouraged England to wrest away control of Florida and other areas held by Spain. Blount and colleagues stood to profit because they held large land holdings in some of these areas.

Professor Melton, who holds academic degrees in both history and law, provides us with a well researched book that describes the conditions which preceded Blount's impeachment and the implications for impeachments that followed Blount's.He describes the struggle that faced Congress in determining what constituted impeachment, as provided for in the U.S. Constitution. In particular, Congress had to decide if impeachment was to be considered as a criminal act or as a political offense. Some of the best parts of this book are the high-quality debates in House and Senate on what Congress should consider asimpeachable offenses. This book is highly recommended as a look into the early years of our country during the post-revolutionary period, although parts of the book are a dense read when the author gets into too much legal narrative and arguments. ... Read more

Product Description
Readers confused by years of conflicting information would like nothing better than to have the Clinton scandals spelled out for them. How better to do this than by presenting the issues in the context of an impeachment trial--a "political science fiction" that projects what could happen, based on the facts we already know? This book does just that, dramatizing the events, using real-life characters appearing under their own names. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (10)

blah
I don't even know what Bob Barr's contribution to this piece of trash was - considering he's a racist, lying, philandering little midget who is one of the biggest hypocrites around.and he's probably illiterate too!

Republicans are just plain evil
Nuff said

Republican Suicide Manual
Tyrrell must be a Democrat plant among the lunatic right.He writes this hilarious suicide scenario for the Republican party--Impeach the President!--and the fools actually follow it.Only, the Barrbarians andHydethesalami don't build their case on Tyrrell's long, paranoid list ofcrimes and/or sins committed by that bad boy and Antichrist, Bill Clinton(now called William Jefferson Clinton to dignify his accusers).Why, theycan't even catch the Evil One with his hand in the cookie jar.But they docatch him with his thing in an airhead, and by God, that's good enough forthem!Off to trial they go with a case spun from whole cloth andfustian--mostly fustian--out of sex, sort of.Thus does the party ofLincoln, already descended to being the party of Nixon, morph into the BlowJob Party.Last one to leave turn out the lights.Neat book.

Almost Prophesy?
This book is a hilarious, irreverent look at the process we are currently experiencing every evening on the news.How sad that Sonny Bono cannot actually be here to add his wit to the proceedings as he did in the book. My only complaint is, I want to know who anonymous is!

Save your money
A very biased view of the Clinton administration. In light of the disasturous impeachment hearing,the author has shown American his true colors...and its not red, white and blue. ... Read more

Product Description
The acclaimed Aryanist and keeper of the Hitler flame (her book, The Lightning and the Sun, inspired such postwar Hitlerites as George Lincoln Rockwell) argues passionately for a society that transcends the human-centered to recognize the value of all living things. Vegetarian, anti-vivisectionist, and opposed to Jewish ritual slaughter, Impeachment of Man will infuriate, inspire, and inform across the ideological spectrum. Makes a great gift for the young person who thinks that concern for animal rights is "left-wing" and began with PETA. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

Well ahead of her time
The author was certainly well ahead of her time concerning the topics of that have become largely the domain of the left--animal rights and ecology. Certainly her enthusiastic support for national socialism puts her beyond the pale for those types who usually profess to care about the issues she examines.

Along with Pentti Linkola she is one of my favorite contrarian writers. As an aside she is certainly one of those who influenced me to become vegan.

Worth Reading With a Few Reservations
I basically agree with everything ninthavatar says in his review. I have a slightly less enthusiastic response to the book, however.

Firstly, it is very hard to read. Not because the concepts are too deep or complex but because Devi is not a very skilled writer. One of the great evils of writing while I was in grade school was the infamous "run-on sentence". Well, Devi has mastered that unholy form. Comma after comma after comma with paranthetical commentary thrown in on top of it all. I found that very annoying and distracted from the points she was trying to make. Perhaps a minor issue but one that I felt compelled to whine about. I'm certain that that in no way alone will or should stop someone from reading this book. Just had to get that off my chest.

Secondly, even though I emotionally agree with most of what she says, practice some of it, and sympathize with the rest to some degree I find that she does not do a very good job of presenting her ideas. Sometimes the logic of her arguments are faulty and sometimes she comes off as not so much a believer in animal rights but as a hater of mankind, which according to the concept of "Love for all living things" which she maintains should be the goal of any man of integrity does not jibe with her thesis. Somehow I do not think that she would be opposed to abortion or euthanasia for humans, for example (even though she hints that she might be in one sentence of one of the final chapters).

Sitting here writing this review I am struggling to think of more to say, not usually a problem for me. It is an interesting book and the ideas she presents are way ahead of their time and it is nice to hear them come from a member of the "far-right" instead of the pathetic, ignorant anti-environment, animal rights-as-a-joke ideas of the mainstream, phony right in America. If you cared enough to search it out on Amazon then it is well worth the money (I purchased mine from ninthavater and was very happy with the service and quality, by the way).

In closing I will get on my soapbox for just a moment. Hunting and fishing for sport should be outlawed and punished by death. If one can prove to some appropriate government agency that hunting and fishing is necessary to their family's survival they could be issued a license to do so. Factory farming should be outlawed and the owners of a facility that incorporates any inhumane practices should be punished by death. Pet owners gulty of mistreating animals should be dealt with in accordance to the severity of the crime, up to and including capital punishment. Euthanasia of animals should be punishable by death. If the owner of a termnally ill animal does not have the means to provide for the painkillers and procedures necessary for a dignified end to his animal's life the government should provide for this.And for the record I do eat meat but only from free-range, humane farms as much as is realistically possible. Fortunately I live in a part of the country where this is usually an easy task but with the end of factory farming small humane farms would spring up in every city and town across the nation. Et cetera, et cetera. I think you get my point. I also remain unconvinced that animals should not be eaten, although it is an intellectual struggle that I go through almost every day. I was hoping that this book, written by someone for whom I have a great deal of respect and political commonalities, would lead me towards an answer. It did not.

Buy the book. It is worth reading, however imperfect. I only hope that another book with these themes can be written better and with more scientific evidence and current information by someone other than the usual Green Party types. Until then though this is money well spent and I hope that it finds its way into the hands of those members of the "far-right" who are little more than thugs and can stear them in a more moral direction.

A great book, but . . . I still eat meat
IMPEACHMENT OF MAN is one of the most radical manifestos of deep ecology, vegetarianism, and animal rights ever written. The first five chapters are devoted to the critique of religious and philosophical forms of anthropocentrism in favor of a "life-centered" outlook that views mankind as part of a larger ecological system, and puts this system as a whole at the center of our moral concern.

The next three chapters are devoted to critiques of the exploitation of animals for diet, dress, amusement, ritual slaughter, and scientific research. Then follows a chapter on "The Rights of Plants."

The book concludes with two important chapters on how to put its insights into practice: "Active Kindness" and "Race, Economics, and Kindness. The Ideal World." The latter is quite frank about the desirability of a world with fewer but better people.

Savitri Devi saw her radical ecological philosophy as consistent with Hitler's National Socialism. This will probably surprise most people, but in fact there is a long tradition of radical right-wing deep ecological thinking.

IMPEACHMENT is a challenging book, but it is also readable and entertaining, filled with all sorts of interesting historical examples and quotations. The chapters are short and easily read in a sitting. The Noontide Press edition is far nicer than the original Indian edition and the subsequent reprint. It is also inexpensive.

As much as I admire this book and Savitri Devi's works as a whole, however, I have not given up the flesh of animals, although I have adopted many of her other recommendations. I do not feed myself a vegetarian diet for the same reason that Savitri Devi did not feed her cats one: I tried it, but I just did not feel as healthy as when I have a moderate amount of animal flesh in my diet. Nor do I eschew drugs made from animal products or based on animal experimentation, for the same reason: animals support their health by preying on other creatures, and since I am an animal, so do I.

I do, however, refuse to support hideous factory farms and cruel practices like Kosher slaughter, or animal testing for frivolous purposes. I think it would be morally preferable to personally to raise or hunt and kill the animals that I eat, but that is not practical.

I recommend IMPEACHMENT to all people interested in these issues. At first glance, this book's eccentricities and "essayistic" lack of the apparatus of "rigorous" argument and scholarship might lead one to dismiss it. But Savitri Devi was certainly capable of rigorous argument. (One of her dissertations is 500+ pages in the philosophy of mathematics.) And on closer inspection, IMPEACHMENT'S arguments are quite compelling. This book richly deserves to be brought into the contemporary dialogue on animal rights and related topics.

Impeachment of Man
Impeachment of Man is Savitri Devi's animal rights/ecology book. She is best known for her wacky ideas about Adolf Hitler being an avatar of the Hindu god Vishnu that she expressed in The Lightning and the Sun. Devi, to put it nicely, is nuts, but Impeachment is pretty great as far as her observations on how all the "man based" religions, meaning Judaism, Christianity and Islam view animals and nature as something to be exploited, used, raped, mastered, etc and in the end leads to death for all. There are also some good misanthropic Might is Right style observations included in this too.

Her writing style is a bit dry but considering Impeachment can be found for less than $10 I'd still recomend it. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (14)

For the Good Times As Well As the Bad
The first few pages did not grab my attention. In fact I was disappointed because it was talking about how it hoped the elections of November 2006 would turn out. My next mistake was comparing this book to others rather than on its own merit.Somewhere after the first several pages, the authors hit their stride or I did, and the book held my attention to the end.

Authors Lindorff and Olshanskyfirst ask the question, "Why impeachment?"in which they lay out the deceit and deception perpetrated by Bush & Co. They give the history of impeachment and how it has evolved in American law. Here Lindorff and Olshansky introduce nuance of impeachment that I had not been aware of. "In 1974, the House Judiciary Committed examined the history of federal impeachment proceedings and issued a report describing three categories of impeachable offenses..." 1) "actions involving or exceeding or abusing the constitutional limits on the powers of the office at the expense of the powers of another branch of government" 2) "conduct fundamentally incomparable with the function and purpose of the office of the offender" and 3) are "actions that involved using the power and authority of the offenders' office for an improper purpose or forpersonal gain."

The authors start the next six chapters with an article of impeachment for George W. Bush. They make excellent arguments for impeachment under several of them e.g. When George Bush adds signing statement to bills stating what parts of the bill he will enforce or ignore,or claims that it does not apply to him, he is relegating the legislative branch to an advisory role rather than an equal branch of government. George Bush has taken the first step toward dictatorship by disavowing his vow to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. Bush claims this right as commander in chief even though the Constitution clearly states that the President is the C in C of the army and navy only.

But Herr Bush is not their only consideration for impeachment. They add Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, and Alberto Gonzalez. Here the authors are kind enough to make an important distinction for the reader. The president is the only one who is protected from criminal indictment while in office. His impeachment means only removal from office. However, all the others described here can be impeached and indicted for criminal charges. The knowledgeable reader will be able to imagine with a fair degree of accuracy what those charges might entail.

The appendices here are kind of the grand prize. They include The Downing Street Memo, the Niger Forgeries, the Taguba Report, the International Committee of the Red Cross Report, the FBI Memo Regarding Torture at Guantanamo, the Gonzalez Memo on Torture, The Federal Indictment of I. Lewis Libby, and the Rumsfeld Memo on Torture. These all point to incompetence, deception of the American people, violation of our treaties and the Geneva Conventions. All of these come under the province of high crimes and misdemeanors.

In closing the authors remind us that, "The Constitution was not just conceived as a document for the good times, It was meant to guide the nation through times of conflict, trouble, and stress as well."

It's also bigger than any one man.





Also recommended:

Wolf, Naomi, "The End of America: A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot."

Nichols, John, "The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders Cure for Royalism."

Greenwald, Glenn, "How Would a Patriot Act: Defending American Values From a President Run Amok."

Center for Constitutional Rights, "Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush.

Michael Isikoff and David Corn, "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War.

Living on Fantasy Island
The nice people who wrote this book put forth 10 "grounds" for impeaching President Bush.

In order for one to put forth these "grounds" for impeachment with a straight face I can only conclude that that person has not really been paying attention, or they have extremely limited reasoning skills

1. Stole Florida election in 2000.
Gore started the recounts, the recount worked its way through the courts, the Supreme Court decided seven to two to stop the recount the way it was being done, and five to four to let Secretary Harris's certification of the election stand.The issue worked its way through the system the way it was supposed to, the system reached a conclusion.Bottom line George Bush "stole" nothing.




2. Lied on Iraq to Congress, the Public, and the United Nations.
To lie is to knowingly tell a falsehood.The position articulated by the Bush administration with regard to Iraq's WMD's and other bad behavior, is the same position that every major intelligence agency believed.The British, the French, the Israelis, the Italians, the Russians, etc. all believe the same thing about Saddam and his weapons program.No objective observer could conclude that Bush lied.

3. 9-11 Cover-Up and Obstruction of Justice.
The most ridiculous charge on a list of ridiculous charges.It truly does not warrant a response.Only the most mentally deranged subscribe to the various 9/11 cover-up theories.

4. Violated Rights of Citizens including Habeas Corpus.
Who?Irregular enemy combatants have no rights.You hold them until the war is over, or you execute them. That's just how it is that's all they're entitled to.Close Gitmo,hang them all.


5. NSA Program to Listen to Citizens without Warrant.
A practice that existed pre-9/11, under the Clinton administration.No lefties are whining about that.POST 9/11 GWB clearly had authority to surveil communications between enemy combatants and persons in the US. Lefties need to remember that FISA does not trump the presidents constitutional powers.

6. Violated International Treaties Including Geneva Convention.
The irregular combatants of Al Qaeda are covered by I believe the fourth Geneva Convention.Under that agreement you regular/terrorist combatants once captured can be interrogated by almost any means and promptly executed.Only real soldiers are entitled to the protections of the of the Geneva conventions.

7. Actively Encouraged, as a Policy, Use of Torture.
No evidence to support this.
8. Gross Negligence on Hurricane Katrina.
1300 schoolbuses underwater, Ray Nagan fleeing with his family to Texas. Louisiana's governor crying instead of asking for federal help.
Whatever flaws there were in FEMa's response, responsibility for the initial response was with the city and state they bungled it incredibly, they failed completely.

9. Iraq Contract Corruption--Bremer "Lost" $8 billion in cash, sole source awards, and gross negligence in managing the peace.
Wars cost money.HeckMassachusetts lost $15 billion on the Big Dig.

10. Stole Ohio election in 2004.
Oh please stop.The lefties in the fools ran a pompous, bloviating, anti-American lowlife (who yes spent four months in Vietnam), who lost by about 4 million votes nationwide, but Bush stole Ohio. Puuuuleeeezzzz.

In summary this is a book by and for moonbats.

echo chamber anybody?
my god, every review here is written by a complete moron.

Statistically, that should be impossible.And yet, you all pull it off!Congratulations.

9-11 cover up?huh?are we back to believing that Mohammad Atta was a patsy, and the jews did it?did the jews that work in the WTC get calls on their "jewish line" not to go into work that day?

Stolen florida election?Ohio in '04?Just because the dems nominated two absolute morons - both rich and privelaged beyond even GW's youthful place in society - one of whom is a gigolo, doesn't mean the election was stolen.

Your ilk stole millions of votes across the country - getting non-citizens and felons and dead people to vote.You even got courts to keep the polls open in St. Louis, and now cry about not having been able to steal enough votes to win.

Anyway... I'm not bothered by a bunch of morons talking to themselves.You're free to do so, and frankly it gives me joy to listen to you occassionally.Enjoy yourselves!

What, no angry reviews from Republicans?
Funny how rightwingers are strangely silent when you really have their number. A book such as this which makes a clear case for the evil and corrupt nature of the class A idiots that have cheated the taxpayer, betrayed the nation and disgraced the U.S. around the world while launching an unnecessary and very costly (half a trillion dollars) invasion of a foreign land should be being attacked soundly by Bill 'Falafel' O'Really, I'm a Man Coulter, Sean Scammity and the other assorted losers the Right holds up as intellects. But no, they'd rather attack 'moonbats, 'libs' and the rest of the world for 'hating America'. Its the Right that truly hates America and damages it.

One item missing from the book: the Bush family has had business dealings with the Bin Ladin family for decades - isn't that worth investigating post-9-11?

So many truths....so little action
This book certainly revealed the lies and tricks committed by our government during the Busch Administration.I am sick of the cover-ups while the so called leaders of government choose to wear blinders and yet rack in the dollars.The Iraq War did not need to happen.

The mishandling of the Katrina situation was especially disturbing.

If you are not afraid to face some ugly truths, this is a book that is hard to put down.

... Read more

Product Description
The Chief Justice presents a dramatic account of two precedent-setting impeachment cases that strengthened the concept of separation of powers and further defined the institutions of American government.Amazon.com Review
With Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist playinga front-and-center role as the presiding officer in President BillClinton's impeachment trial, it's no wonder that his 1992 study of thetwo most important previous impeachments in United States history wasbrought back into print. But anyone looking for political commentarywill probably be disappointed--Grand Inquests is astraightforward, and surprisingly readable, narrative account,top-heavy with historical details.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase was impeached in 1805 both for hispolitical views and as a result of his demeanor as a judge. Rehnquistacknowledges that Chase was "impatient, overbearing, and arrogant,"but asserts that his behavior falls far short of the grounds forimpeachment: high crimes and misdemeanors. He further argues that theacquittal of Chase helped safeguard the independence of the SupremeCourt, preventing future Congresses from removing judges "whose viewsthey considered to be unwise or out of keeping with the times." Theacquittal of President Andrew Johnson in his 1868 trial was a similarvictory for the executive branch, permitting future chief executivesto govern as they see fit ... even if that runs counter to the desiresof Congress.

Rehnquist makes it clear that he believes the impeachments of bothChase and Johnson were politically motivated, and that it was a goodthing for the United States that neither was convicted. He says arelaxed standard of impeachment would have been like "a sword ofDamocles, designed not to fall but to hang" over the head of futurepresidents who would fear removal from office if they did not go alongwith Congress. --Linda Killian ... Read more

Customer Reviews (13)

A Jewel of a Book
This book is much more than an account of the two major impeachments in U.S. history. The bulk of the book consists of a remarkably well-written history lesson covering the period of 1775 to the 1868 Johnson impeachment trial. The last part of the book then discusses the lessons to be learned from these two impeachment efforts.

The 1805 impeachment trial of Justice Chase, a Federalist judge, involved his (mis)handling of 3 cases as a circuit rider judge (in those days Supreme Court justices actually spent most of their time riding circuit). The best the Republicans could do was a 19-15 vote for conviction on one of the Articles, still 4 votes short of the 2/3 needed to remove Chase from office. The effort failed because 6 Republicans defected and voted for acquittal, realizing the impeachment effort was partisan in nature and contrary to what the founding fathers intended.

The 1868 impeachment effort against Johnson similarly failed when 7 Republicans voted against removal. (Terminology here can be confusing; in 1805 Jefferson's party was called "Republican", and later came to be called "Democratic". In 1868 "Republican" was used for the new party formed in the 1850's.) These 7 Republicans can now be seen as the true constitutional heroes that they are. Had the radical Republicans succeeded in removing Johnson, it would mean that from then on the President would serve at the pleasure of the Senate, and the true purpose of the impeachment provision in the Constitution would have been obliterated in a sea of partisanship.

Rehnquist concludes that "The importance of these two acquittals in our constitutional history can hardly be overstated....These two "cases"--decided not by the courts but by the United States Senate--surely contributed as much to the maintenance of our tripartite federal system of government as any case decided by any court." He is right, and he has contributed enormously to our understanding of this issue by his articulate discussion of it contained in this book.

A Grand Piece of Writing
Who knew that the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, leader of the conservative counter revolution against the legacy of the Warren Court, wrote so well?

You would not guess that from his opinions penned over a generation. His court writing is exact but dry, a great contrast to the colorful rhetoric of his conservative colleague, Antonin Scalia.

But in "Grand Inquests," a telling of the impeachment trials of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase and President Andrew Johnson, Rehnquist demonstrates a compelling narrative style and the novelist's keen eye for detail. Rehnquist also demonstrates the good novelist's ability to describe the important details at considerable length while limiting the lesser facts in length.

The important details of these two impeachments surround the personalities of the major players that brought about the impeachment instead of ascribing the trials to historical circumstances, as if the impeachments were forced by mysterious forces instead of angry human beings. Rehnquist paints vivid portraits of Andrew Johnson, a one-time tailor and self-made politician, the ambitious and independent Edwin Stanton, whose refusal to give up his post as Secretary of War set the impeachment proceedings in motion, and the Radical Republicans who were furious with Johnson for obstructing Reconstruction, Thaddeus Stevens, Ben Wade, George Boutwell, Charles Sumner, and Ben Butler.

Rehnquist makes a convincing argument that men make their own destiny by their choices when he implies, quite correctly in my view, that Justice Chase would not have been impeached if he were not abrasive and heavy handed in court, and President Johnson would not have been impeached if he had been more even tempered in his disagreement about Reconstruction and presidential appointment power with the opposition Republicans. Johnson, for example, referred to Radical Republican leaders Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner as "traitors."

Both impeachment proceedings occurred in the wake of highly charged political times, Rehnquist observes. Chase was impeached shortly after President John Adams had packed the federal government with appointees of his Federalist Party in the final hours of his presidency. And Adams had also tried to stifle dissent by his political opponents, incited by his idelogical adversary, Thomas Jefferson, with the repressive alien and sedition acts. Johnson faced impeachment during the difficult aftermath of the Civil War. Brave Senators such as Bradley of Vermont and Gaillard of South Carolina risked their political careers to acquit Chase. Likewise, Senators Edmund Ross of Kansas and Lyman Trumbull of Illinois defied the public hysteria against Johnson.

Rehnquist brilliantly cuts through the emotions of the times to show that Chase basically faced impeachment because of biased instructions to a grand jury and questionable instructions to a jury in a criminal trial involving sedition. Johnson was impeached for opposing Reconstruction and firing Secretary of War Edwin Stanton.In firing Stanton, Johnson's political enemies asserted that he was in violation of a congressional act, The Tenure of Office Act, which called for Senate approval of presidential firings. Clinton, of course, whose trial Rehnquist presided over, was impeached for engaging in oral sex in a bathroom near the Oval Office.

Presidential powers became more firmly defined by Supreme Court decisions in the 20th century, Rehnquist notes. A President's sole authority to hire and fire executive department political appointees was not as clear in 1866 as it is in 2006. Indeed the rule of law on presidential power to fire at will political appointees was not decided until "Humphrey's Executor v. United States" in 1935. The Court then held that President Franklin D. Roosevelt had the power to fire Federal Trade Commissioner William E. Humphrey on political grounds. Today we would laugh at the idea that a President would have to seek permission from Congress to fire an executive branch official who was not a career public employee.

Rehnquist has written the best book on impeachment. Read it and enjoy it.

[Hansen Alexander is an attorney who lives and works in New York City. He is the author, most recently, of the introductory legal text "A Tort is Not a Pastry."]

A pedestrian examination of two pivotal impeachments.
There really isn't much to say about Chief Justice Rehnquist's book. _Grand Inquests_ is an inquiry into the impeachments of Justice Chase and President Johnson but the inquiry is done without any real depth or serious historical research. It's a bland recounting of basic facts of the cases that, as Richard Bernstein has already pointed out, ignores most of the relevant studies of this subject. Basically Rehnquist presents a great deal of the immediate detail but fails to place the events firmly in the context of the times. Also he regularly adds in completely irrelevant material, such as in the discussion of Chase's actions as a trial judge he cites his experience in litigation during the 1950s and 60s, which can have practically no bearing on the subject of the trial procedures of 1800. If you're looking for a long winded presentation of the details of individual charges and descriptions of testimony heard by the Senate during these trials than you may enjoy this book. Otherwise any competent constitutional history can provide just as good a discussion in only about ten pages.

Review of Grand Inquests
What I'd hoped for was a historical perspective on the impeachment process as a primer to further reading on the Clinton impeachment proceedings.The historical context provided is, at best truncated--the history reads like an early draft compiled from a chronologically ordered fact list.Hence, the reader is to often required to make the connections between historical precedent and subsequent results. Also troubling were some typographical errors.For example, my paperback edition has James Buchanan being elected president in 1865.When a nonhistorian catches errors like this, doubts begin arising about other listed facts.

I thought too that the book is not especially well written.I ran across too many paragraphs whose thoughts seemed to have been morphed in with insufficient attention to their contributions to context.As one who believes fuzzy writing to be symptomatic of fuzzy thinking, alarm bells went off each time.

In the end, I wasn't confident that I had gotten a good primer for the follow up reading I'd planned.

Good summary of the issues surrounding impeachment
Rehnquist is obviously alot more thoughtful than the "liberal" community, in which I often count myself, has been led to believe.He provides a good summary of the issues that surrounded the impeachments ofChase & Johnson, the constitutional questions these events raised &helped to settle, and their long-term implications.Rehnquist is not, inthis book anyhow, the best stylist in the world, but he also doesn'tdescend into so much legal mumbo-jumbo that non-lawyers would be turnedoff.Also, his sections of background history are just OK.History buffsmay find some factual, emphasis or interpretative points to dispute inthose sections. ... Read more

Product Description
The little understood yet volcanic power of impeachment lodged in the Congress is dissected through history by the nation's leading legal scholar on the subject. Berger offers authoritative insight into "high crimes and misdemeanors." He sheds new light on whether impeachment is limited to indictable crimes, on whether there is jurisdiction to impeach for misconduct outside of office, and on whether impeachment must precede indictment. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

This is a must read for the House Judiciary Committee.
It's hard to believe it's been nearly 25 years since Harvard Law ProfessorRaoul Berger wrote his treatise on impeachment.It was then, in thoseturbulent years of constitutional crisis, the definitive, stabilizing voiceof reason.The rock-solid scholarly research allowed calmer minds to reachbeyond the excitement of the moment, and to solemnly deliberate whether theactions of our President constituted "high crimes andmisdemeanors" as that phrase was intended by theConstitution.

Today's crisis is no less susceptible to emotionalconclusions, absent the foundations of law.Republicans and Democratsalike will form conclusions based upon political expediency, and upon whatthey perceive the will of the public to be.But those political winds haveno place in Professor Berger's analysis.Here you will find theinescapable truth of sound legal research.

I had occasion to dine withboth Professor Berger and his friend Archibald Cox some 13 years after thelast attempt to impeach a sitting President.We talked about politics, andthe law.Politics change from week to week, swirling like the wind.Butthe law gives us a rock to cling to in the most treacherous of storms. Professor Berger's work remains a rock of reason today. ... Read more

Product Description
This is the first in-depth examination of politics of theClinton impeachment. While popular press treatments of the impeachmentfocus on partisan animosity and ethical standards, Morris looks at theimpact of local constituencies on impeachment. Though most legislatorssided with their constituents on the issue of impeachment, asignificant number (nearly all Republican) did not. Using the mostrecent work on the impact of money on elections, Morris investigatesthe financial dynamics of the Clinton impeachment and argues that theour current system of campaign finance enabled House Republicans toimpeach the President and provided them with the means to retain theirmajority in the House. Morris also argues that money (and the abilityto raise it) play a far more important role in the American politicalsystem than previously realized, often determining the winners andlosers in the most important controversies and conflicts facing thenation. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

"Judicial Impeachment" is peachy
In this book, the author goes over three impeachment trials of federal judges, dating from the 1980s. All three judges were accused by the House of Representatives, and convicted by the Senate, of having committed"high crimes and misdemeanors" while serving as judges. In allthree cases, the evidence was heard by a committee of Senators, while thefull Senate voted on the question of guilt or innocence. All three judgeswere removed from office on account of their misconduct. The three judges,and their crimes, were: Harry Claiborne, convicted of tax evasion; AlceeHastings, convicted of various offences; and Walter Nixon, convicted ofcovering up his role in seeking leniency for a friend's son. Giving ananalysis of each trial, the author finds in each case that there are issuesnot only with the defendants' behavior but with the behavior of thegovernment as well. The book is a well-put-together narrative and should beof interest to students of the federal judiciary and the impeachmentprocess. ... Read more

Product Description
This fascinating study of the historical and political landscape of impeachment begins with the development of colonial governments in North America, and then chronicles the events that led to the Revolution and subsequent war for American Independence.The book proceeds to detail the impeachment practice under the first state constitutions, along with an analysis of the impeachment provisions of the Federal Constitution adopted in 1789.Finally, several case studies are reported in The History, Law and Politics of Federal Impeachment, including the impeachment of Senator William Blount, the impeachment and trials of U. S. District Judge John Pickering, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, and Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. About the Author: J. Wilson McCallister received his JD from the University of Iowa in 1969 and entered the private practice of law in Dubuque, Iowa. He currently lives in Bonita Springs, Florida and Bettendorf, Iowa, and is working on his next book which examines the compromises that produced the U.S. Constitution.Publisher's Web site: http://www.strategicpublishinggroup.com/title/TheHistoryLawAndPoliticsOfFederalImpeachment.html ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

The Impeachment of Bill Clinton: Everybody lost...
Ultimately, Daniel Cohen achieves his sense of balance in "The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton" by finding all the parties involved guilty of something.The Republican party was able to take advantage of competing standards in being critical of Clinton's behavior, applying a legal standard to his political behavior and a political standard to his legal actions.In a similar fashion Cohen uses various standards to find fault with one and all, which, I dare say, is a position most young readers can readily buy into.

In 1998 the U.S. House of Representatives voted for two articles of impeachment against President Clinton: committing perjury and obstructing justice.Clinton was acquitted by the U.S. Senate after a brief trial, but Cohen is well aware that the story involves much more than the Constitutional issues.Cohen presents the Monica Lewinsky scandal in the context of the "Character" issue that had followed Clinton throughout his run for the White House.Detailing the string of events that brought Lewinsky to the attention of Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr.Even though he is writing for a younger audience, Cohen pays attention to details: he points out the employee photograph of Lewinski from the Department of Defense was used because it was the only one available until journalists finally tracked her down.A small detail, but important because in the world of news images matter.The chapters in which Cohen details how the White House counterattacked the building story and the testimony that became the focal point of the impeachment effort.

During the whole impeachment affair I always like to read news magazines rather than newspapers, because I appreciated the sense of perspective that you get from something that comes out weekly rather than daily.Cohen certainly takes advantage of the persepctive time affords him.I also like the fact that Cohen does not let his objectivity stand in the way of being critical: he notes that Betty Currie, the president's secretary, would have been an obvious witness to call but that the impeachment managers did not want to have a string of black witnesses being questioned by white males.Again, I think this sort of detail speaks to the quality of this book.

Ultimately, the information in this book may enlighten, but it probably will not persuade anybody, mainly because everybody's mind is made up on this one.I remember thinking it was a big mistake for the U.S. Supreme Court to let lawyers go after a sitting U.S. President in a civil trial and when Clinton denied having "sexual relations" with Lewinski I immediately knew that he was ruling out intercourse, but not other things.Along with what happened in Florida, it was an interesting couple of years educating children about the wonderful world of politics in this country.Of course, I am not sure too many students are interested in beating this particular dead horse, but this is an excellent treatment of the sordid chapter of recent American history.

A Fair Tale
Extremely well-written in an unbiased telling of the facts, Cohen presents this entire scandal in "the best light possible."Toldchronologically, he incudes black/white photos and documents that keep thisbook moving at an acceptable pace. A much appreciated addition to anyschool or public library, this will be a popular reference for any schoolproject concerning Presidents.Readers are left to draw their ownconclusions about the "charmed" life and bad choices of this U.S. President.You can't do much better than that, Mr. Cohen. ... Read more

Product Description
This book compiles the proceedings of the 18th Annual BERTRAND RUSSELL PEACE LECTURES delivered by international legal expert Francis A. Boyle at the Centre for Peace Studies, McMaster University, in January, 2007. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Fine account of Palestine and US foreign policy
Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois, Champaign, gave the 18th Annual Bertrand Russell Peace Lectures in January 2007 at the Centre for Peace Studies, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada. This fascinating book prints these talks - `Palestine, Palestinians and International Law' and `The National Campaign to Impeach President George W. Bush' - with an update to 17th October 2007 and reports of various campaigns to boycott Israel.

Boyle quotes Lord Russell's last message, of 31st January 1970, "For over 20 years Israel has expanded by force of arms. After every stage in this expansion Israel has appealed to `reason' and has suggested `negotiations'. This is the traditional role of the imperial power, because it wishes to consolidate with the least difficulty what it has already taken by violence. Every new conquest becomes the new basis of the proposed negotiation from strength, which ignores the injustice of the previous aggression."

Boyle shows how the US state assists Israel's efforts to maintain its illegal occupation. He notes that Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir said in 1991 that his strategy was to stall negotiations for the next ten years, to arrange countless meetings to prevent a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement. The Israeli state still follows this strategy, witness its participation in Sarkozy's fraudulent `Mediterranean Union'.

Bit the strategy of forcible intervention continues too. For example, in June 2007 the US and Israeli states organised General Dahlan's attempted coup against the democratically-elected government in Gaza.

Boyle also shows how the illegal US invasion and occupation of Iraq and its threats against Iran are jeopardising world peace. He demonstrates how the US state is promoting civil war in Iraq, so that Iraqis kill each other not Americans. Bush senior encouraged the Shia in the south and the Kurds in the north to rise against Saddam, to split the state into three parts and the US-written Constitution continues this effort.

Boyle urges the American people to impeach Bush and also to stop the Democrat-controlled Congress from voting more hundreds of billions of dollars enabling the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Recent polls showed that both these are popular demands: most Americans want to end the war and impeach Bush.
... Read more

Product Description
The Impeachment Trial of the NH Supreme Court Chief Justice is a historical account of the event, taken from transcripts and evidence as well as interviews of participants.The author was a participating Senator during the trial and offers both the political and legislative perspective.Includes numerous photos of the witnesses and participants, and perspectives of those who were part of the event.

The Trial is a wonderful study into Judicial ethics and the political ramifications of impeaching a chief justice. ... Read more

Product Description
Webster's bibliographic and event-based timelines are comprehensive in scope, covering virtually all topics, geographic locations and people. They do so from a linguistic point of view, and in the case of this book, the focus is on "Impeachment," including when used in literature (e.g. all authors that might have Impeachment in their name). As such, this book represents the largest compilation of timeline events associated with Impeachment when it is used in proper noun form. Webster's timelines cover bibliographic citations, patented inventions, as well as non-conventional and alternative meanings which capture ambiguities in usage. These furthermore cover all parts of speech (possessive, institutional usage, geographic usage) and contexts, including pop culture, the arts, social sciences (linguistics, history, geography, economics, sociology, political science), business, computer science, literature, law, medicine, psychology, mathematics, chemistry, physics, biology and other physical sciences. This "data dump" results in a comprehensive set of entries for a bibliographic and/or event-based timeline on the proper name Impeachment, since editorial decisions to include or exclude events is purely a linguistic process. The resulting entries are used under license or with permission, used under "fair use" conditions, used in agreement with the original authors, or are in the public domain. ... Read more

Product Description
This is a reproduction of a book published before 1923.This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process.We believe this work is culturally important, and despite the imperfections, have elected to bring it back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide.We appreciate your understanding of the imperfections in the preservation process, and hope you enjoy this valuable book. ... Read more

Product Description
This reproduction was printed from a digital file created at the Library of Congress as part of an extensive scanning effort started with a generous donation from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.The Library is pleased to offer much of its public domain holdings free of charge online and at a modest price in this printed format.Seeing these older volumes from our collections rediscovered by new generations of readers renews our own passion for books and scholarship. ... Read more