It's Dastardly!

February 2020. The Super Bowl, once again held without the Cleveland Browns, the Buffalo Bills, or the Ohio State Marching Band. The Iowa caucuses, plagued by app glitches and conspiracy theories. The State of the Union address, with women in white, a grieving father in handcuffs, and grand dramatic moments (Russ Limbaugh and Nancy Pelosi come to mind).All in the midst of an impeachment trial.

While the Nixon impeachment proceedings heated up in the summer of 1974, I was a counselor at summer camp, with a cabin full of fifth and sixth grade girls. Swamp cake on the dessert menu seemingly had as much impact in that cloistered setting as did Nixon’s resignation on August 9.

When Bill Clinton was impeached by the House on December 19, 1998, it was five days from the end of The Salvation Army’s Christmas effort, and I doubt I even turned on the television. I have no recollection of watching the January trial in the Senate, nor do I remember much in the way of personal outrage in those pre-“me too” days. Impeachment took a back seat to a challenging ministry, three energetic boys, and grad school.

In 2020, I’ve been more engaged with the impeachment drama – or lack thereof. A couple of snarky questions first. Is it OK to notice an obvious toupee, or wonder if a constitutional expert who previously defended Epstein wears boxers or briefs? Does Adam Schiff really have a pencil neck? Do fidget spinners help fidgety senators?

Two observations. First, Chief Justice Roberts refused to ask a question submitted by Senator Rand Paul, purportedly an attempt to reveal the identity of the original whistleblower. While Roberts was circumspect about it, I could hear the echo of my friend Shirley’s famous saying: “We’ll have none of that!” 

Rumors of this person’s identity have been quietly circulating in the great abyss of the internet for a while, but now, just days after Paul’s attempt to “out” him or her, posts started showing up in my social media feed with a full name and conspicuously photo-shopped images of the whistleblower next to prominent Democrats. What does it say about us when we take delight in potentially putting another human being in danger, when the law promises protection? Who in their right mind would report alleged wrong-doing if they fear their name will be vindictively spread across the internet?

My second observation is “inappropriate,” defined as “not suitable or proper in the circumstances.” Picking your nose in public is inappropriate. After the Super Bowl halftime show, the battle of appropriateness had a field day on social media. In the late 90s, Bill Clinton suggested his relationship with an intern was “inappropriate.”

Now, in 2020, “inappropriate” wins the word of the week. Senator Lamar Alexander: “The Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.” Or, as Ohio’s own Senator Rob Portman concluded, “I believe that some of the president’s actions in this case – including asking a foreign country to investigate a potential political opponent and the delay of aid to Ukraine – were wrong and inappropriate.” There’s that word again. 

I’m not sure when he said it, but Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh gave us an alternative to inappropriate. “If the president does something dastardly the impeachment process is available.” Dastardly, as in wicked and cruel, is a great-sounding word. If inappropriate isn’t enough for impeachment today, could dastardly be tomorrow? 

Here’s the challenge: what are appropriate consequences for inappropriate or even dastardly actions? On the playground, some stop the behavior when confronted. Others admit no guilt, and even defiantly say, “What are you going to do to me?” Does the system, as it’s currently set up, have an answer to that question?

A final observation. Remember when the internet world was abuzz about “the dress”? Was it blue and black, or were its stripes gold and white? The opening challenges of 2020 go much deeper. Amazing dancing, female empowerment or soft porn? Innocent, guilty, perfect, inappropriate, criminal or dastardly? If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, is truth as well?