The Turtle & the Salmon
“Congress was right in not limiting, by its reconstruction acts, the right of suffrage to whites; but wrong in the exclusion from suffrage of certain classes of citizens and all unable to take its prescribed retrospective oath, and wrong also in the establishment of despotic military governments for the States and in authorizing military commissions for the trial of civilians in time of peace. There should have been as little military government as possible; no military commissions; no classes excluded from suffrage; and no oath except one of faithful obedience and support to the Constitution and laws, and of sincere attachment to the constitutional Government of the United States. “
Salmon Portland Chase, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court
Chief Justice John Roberts is said to be preparing for the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. This includes reviewing the rules and traditions of the Senate, it also involves studying the role of the Chief Justice in the two previous trials of US presidents. Let's take a stroll back in American history, and see two very different examples that Chief Justice Roberts is considering.
President Bill Clinton was impeached in late 1998, and his Senate trial was held between January 7 and February 22, 1999. It has been documented that the outcome had been agreed to by party leaders before the trial started. Hence, Chief Justice William Rehnquist accurately sums up his role in this quote from a letter to his friend: “I did nothing in particular, and did it very well.”
Providing irrefutable evidence that a Chief Justice can be a petty brat, Rehnquist also wrote, “...the trial is in one sense an unwelcome burden …..I have been relieved of none of my duties here at the court.” In 1999, he told Senators that, “"I underwent the sort of culture shock that naturally occurs when one moves from the very structured environment of the Supreme Court to what I shall call, for want of a better phrase, the more freeform environment of the Senate." These quotes are taken from the following article:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/29/politics/william-rehnquist-impeachment-trial-senate/index.html
That is one potential. It is interesting to compare this to the role of Chief Justice Salmon Chase one hundred thirty one years earlier. I've been looking at Chase's role in the impeachment trial, and some of his career. There is not much about him in the books on impeachment that I started collecting in 1974. So I looked through some other history books, and have found some. I plan to do more research on the internet.
Chase was recognized as a liberal in those times. He was experienced in serving in both of the other branches of the federal government, as a senator and as President Lincoln's Treasury Secretary. He had also served as a Governor. His interest in political parties seemed fluid – in large part because he wanted to become president – and there are mentions of him being a Democrat, before helping to form the Free Soil Party, and eventually a republican.
In his earlier years of practicing law, Chase was an outspoken opponent of Slavery. He represented “run-away slaves” in northern courts. He advocated that all people had the right to vote, no matter their sex or race. He sounds like the complete opposite of Rehnquist.
During the trial of President Andrew Johnson, Chase played an active role in determining what evidence – including witnesses – could or could not be introduced in the trial. He also ruled on a number of procedural issues. He refused to allow senators to turn the trial into a circus. A number of senators were unhappy with Chief Justice Chase during the trial, but knew he would walk out if they didn't honor his rulings. Yet, history tends to indicate that the senators reached the correct verdict. Hence, Chase's role can be viewed as setting precedents that Roberts can and should follow.
At this point in time, we can only speculate if Roberts will conduct his role like Rehnquist, like Chase, or somewhere in the middle. Yet it could be his role that decides the eventual outcome of the trial. If John Bolton testifies -- or not – will be a huge factor in determining the outcome. Hopefully the decision on if Bolton testifies isn't allowed to be decided by Mitch McConnell. If the Democrats can't get four republicans to joing them on this, Roberts will do the right thing.
Peace,
H2O Man
= new reply since forum marked as read
and one of my favorites. I sent you another one 
Enjoy! LOL for the relatively speaking ''normal''.
