Something happened on Friday, July 25th, 2008!

The name of the House Hearings on Friday morning was "Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations," and many of us watched the nearly six hours of proceedings on C-Span.

Though last month, Representative Dennis Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio, and recent Presidential Candidate, had directed 35 articles of impeachment at President George W. Bush, yesterday, in what appeared to be a careful compromise agreement with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and the other Democratic Congressional Leadership, no mention was to be made of Impeachment or directly of any officials of the Executive by name.

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers distributed to all witnesses in writing the order that any "personal abuse, innuendo, or ridicule of the president" or any "suggestion of mendacity" would be ruled out of order and dealt with firmly.

That noble goal was substantially swept away as the hearings went on.

From the beginning the feisty audience, not to mention the witnesses, threatened to get out of hand. A rattle of applause, shouts, and cries sounded for Representative Kucinich and his wife as they entered the hearing room. Later, invective was shouted, and crumpled papers were hurled at the dais. Chairman Conyers, with or without the urging of the Republican Committee members, repeatedly appealed for decorum. Gold Star Mother Cindy Sheehan, who is running for Nancy Pelosi's seat in San Francisco, was ruled out of order and escorted from the gallery, as were others.

Besides Rep. Kucinich, the explorations of Constitutional limitations on Executive Power were presented by former Federal Prosecutor and Congress person Elizabeth Holzman, former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr, former Associate Attorney General Bruce Fein, former Mayor of Salt Lake City Bob "Rocky" Anderson, Professor Schwartz of Northwestern, and former LA Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi.

George Mason Law Professor Jeremy Rabkin and Northwestern Legal Professor Stephen Presser spoke for the Republican defense.

Elizabeth Holzman appeared to me as having the most comprehensive understanding of what might be done. A former Watergate prosecutor, as well as representative, she grasped the major argument that egregious abuses of power, which she listed, had occurred over the last eight years, and if something were not done now, the pattern of power, nearly out of control, would likely become permanent.

She suggested that a swift, narrow, singular stab at impeachment (without calling it that, except by indirection) was the only viable immediate remedy. Because some of the charges carried a penalty of capital punishment, no statute of limitations would apply.

Former Mayor Anderson was more passionate, along similar lines.

When asked how limitations on Executive abuses of power might ever be dealt with short of Impeachment, former Associate Attorney General Bruce Fein said: "Short of impeachment, there isn't anything you can do about a president."

Both former Congressman Barr, now Libertarian Candidate for President, and former Prosecutor Bugliosi tended to argue that all of the more serious crimes committed by those in the Executive Branch could be dealt with in the Criminal Courts after the malfeasors left office.

[Prosecutor Bugliosi, after all, has just published a new book entitled: THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER.]

The Republican witnesses, Professors Rabkin and Presser, argued that there was no credible evidence of abuse of power or obstruction of justice in the present Administration. Professor Rabkin called the tone of the deliberations "slightly demented," and suggested that the evidence for Impeachment brought by Representative Kucinich and the witnesses supporting that evidence, had formulated "a wild conspiracy theory."

Professor Presser came up, on two occasions, with examples of Presidents as far back as Woodrow Wilson and as recently as Lyndon Johnson who had committed violations similar, which might have brought unfair demands for Impeachment.

Professor Presser, who appeared before the Committee in 1998 to present evidence against President William J. Clinton, made the distinction Friday morning that President Clinton had acted out of self interest, but there was no evidence that President Bush had.

Repeatedly requesting that Chairman Conyers reprimand the audience or have the floor cleared, Ranking Member Republican Lamar Smith of Texas said that nothing was going to come of the hearings because there was "no evidence to support impeachment."

Republican Representative Dan Lungren, a former California Attorney General, sneered at the proceedings, calling them "Friday morning show trials."

But both Professors Rabkin and Presser seemed forced to admit that, if evidence supporting Kucinich's allegations proved accurate, Congress should act to investigate.

"The options are limited, but there are options," Holtzman said.

Some suggested a bill which would limit the president's authority to pardon members of his administration to six months before he left office.

And drawing on the experience of Watergate, Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) proposed the start of an inquiry into possible illegal actions in the Bush Administration, similar to that of the Senate committee that investigated the Nixon Administration, which would carry over into 2009 and beyond. Those hearings led to the indictment and jailing of a dozen Nixon officials, including the Attorney General.

*****

That latter solution struck me as one which might be adopted, in the light of mounting evidence in every governmental/corporate element of our nation, that numerous examples of massive fraud and criminality, aided and abetted by the Bush Administration, have taken place. And that, as banks, real estate groups, and industries by the hundreds begin to collapse, we have not yet begun to drain a swamp which might well pollute the next Administration

If so, SOMETHING HAPPENED ON FRIDAY, and beleaguered champions of the Constitution, such as Representatives Kucinich and Ron Paul, should be celebrated for their patriotism and farsightedness.

Depressingly, virtually no element of our Media bothered to cover these Hearings seriously.

Hell, aside from what I could remember, I had to get my information from something called Buzzflash!