David Corn is Washington editor of The Nation magazine, the oldest political weekly in America. He writes on a host of subjects, including politics, the White House, Congress, and national security.

He has broken stories on Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Oliver North, Colin Powell, Richard Gephardt, Hillary Clinton, Rush Limbaugh, Clarence Thomas, Senator Paul Laxalt, Senator Robert Bennett, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon, and other Washington players.

Corn has contributed articles, including political satire and book reviews, to The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Boston Globe, Newsday, Harper’s, The New Republic, Mother Jones, The Washington Monthly, The Village Voice, The New York Press -- which features his weekly column "Loyal Opposition" -- and many other publications. He also writes for several on-line magazines, including Slate, HotWired, and Salon.

He is the author of Blond Ghost: Ted Shackley and the CIA's Crusades (Simon and Schuster, 1994). The Washington Monthly called Blond Ghost "an amazing compendium of CIA fact and lore." The Washington Post noted that Blond Ghost "deserves a space on that small shelf of worthwhile books about the agency." The New York Times termed it "a scorchingly critical account of an enigmatic figure who for two decades ran some of the agency's most important, and most controversial, covert operations."

Corn was a contributor to Unusual Suspects, an anthology of mystery and crime fiction (Vintage/Black Lizard, 1996). His contribution to the book -- a short story entitled “My Murder” -- was nominated for a 1997 Edgar Allan Poe Award by Mystery Writers of America. The story was republished in The Year's 25 Finest Crime and Mystery Stories (Carroll & Graf, 1997).

Corn frequently is a guest on television and radio talk shows. He has been a panelist on CNN's Capital Gang, and he is a regular on C-SPAN. He has appeared on ABC News, CBS Morning News, Fox Television News, Fox New Cable, Crossfire (CNN), Washington Week in Review (PBS), Equal Time (CNBC), Tim Russert (CNBC), Tribune Television, MSNBC, and other shows and networks.

He was a co-host (with Pat Buchanan) of the nationally-syndicated radio show Buchanan and Company. He has appeared often on the syndicated Diane Rehm radio show, and provided commentary to National Public Radio. He is a featured guest on RadioNation, a nationally-syndicated show. He has contributed political commentary to BBC Radio, CBC Radio, Pacifica Radio, Australian National Radio, and has been a guest on scores of call-in radio programs.

Corn, thirty-nine years old, is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Brown University. Before joining The Nation, he worked for Ralph Nader's Center for Study of Responsive Law and Harper’s magazine.

Click here to read more of David Corn's Loyal Opposition.

Impeachment Madness

Lies matter. But some lies matter more than others. Compare two presidential prevarications: Bill Clinton fibbed about his exchanges with Monica Lewinsky, and his administration falsely asserted the bombed factory in Sudan, which manufactured pharmaceuticals for the nation, was a top-secret site that only produced the precursor for dreaded chemical weapons. The first lie was stupid, inane. The second literally beared life-and-death consequences. And which one does the political class go ga-ga over? Clinton's being crucified for the wrong misdeed.

It seems as if the political-media machine has two speeds: frenzy and neglect. Shouldn't conservative Republicans, who claim to care about checks on government authority, and liberal Democrats, who claim to care about the beleaguered citizens of the world, both be clamoring for a congressional inquiry into Clinton's misguided act of war? Instead, we're treated to Impeach-o-rama.

Thankfully, I was out of town when the report was dumped on the what-do-we-do-now GOPers in the House. Following the story via cable television and newspapers, a non-Washingtonian could be excused for wondering if mass hysteria had taken hold of the residents of politerati land. The report remains the handiwork of a politically-motivated fellow whose grip on reality is hardly firm. The proof? Starr, a mercenary corporate lawyer for tobacco interests, has compared himself to Atticus Finch of To Kill a Mockingbird. Can anyone trust his evaluation of murky evidence, which has not been treated to any cross-examination? As could have been predicted, Starr went over the top, writing his report as a brief for impeachment, instead of just handing Congress a set of (what he believed to be) factual findings. Starr's report, in an odd way, showed Clinton as more controlled than his foes imagined. On all but two of their ten in-person interludes, he withheld the executive ejaculate. Lewinsky comes across as a Hollywood cliche: the bad-news femme who seemingly offers a married man free-and-easy sex; she then mistakes lust for love and turns into a psychologically unsteady nightmare who, once spurned, threatens revenge. The report is drenched more in bathos than semen.

Sure, Starr, who struck out in his attempt to unearth Clinton improbity regarding Whitewater, Travelgate, and Filegate, might have nailed the President on Monicagate. But his report deserves a skeptical and cautious reception, not the reaction we would expect if Armageddon was coming true. Impeachment is serious. But impeachment over sex-and-lies is silly. Russia, the keeper of thousands of nuclear warheads, is in chaos. Japan is turning into a financial sinkhole. Twenty million Bangladesh residents have been flooded out of their homes. More evidence has emerged recently to confirm global warming is a real-time threat. Over 40 million Americans are without health insurance; 160 million others are in the clutches of vulturous HMOs. WHILE the political system is being corrupted further and further by monied special interests, the Senate blocks reform. Yet what grips the imagination of the opinion gatekeepers is this made-for-ratings, scummy soap opera. One political correspondent for a prominent television news outfit complained to me that he cannot get any non-Monica reports on the air.

The insanity was highlighted, unintentionally, by a New York Times editorial published the day Starr dropped his report on Congress. "The country demands a serious Presidential discussion about the Lewinsky case and its moral, legal and political implications." Say what? Where's the sign of this popular yearning for more on Monica? It's not there. And that's the problem for the Republicans. Starr's report has gone beyond just-lies to obstruction of justice and witness-tampering. Which means it's harder for the Republicans to take a pass. An impeachment inquiry that probes the salacious nitty-gritty is a foregone conclusion, for Starr's findings cannot be accepted on face-value. Representative Henry Hyde and the Republicans on his Judiciary Committee must put on their waders and dig into the muck the public cannot stand. (Who, except for Jay Leno and David Letterman, wants to see Linda Tripp on the witness stand?) It is stunning that the polls have barely changed since the first week of Monica-mania. For months, Republicans have cried, just wait until the public gets the truth, then it will turn on Clinton. After he acknowledged wrongdoing on August 17 and, now, after the Starr's report release, public sentiment has not shifted. What's it going to take? When I was called into service by CNN on Sunday, a Washington Times reporter said, Just wait until the depositions and back-up material are dumped on the citizenry. That's getting desperate. It may pain self-proclaimed virtue czar William Bennett, but the public seems to have resolved the issue; Americans can accept a fellow who behaves caddishly in his persona; affairs as the leader of a nation.

Legislators should not govern by polls. But given that lawyers of good faith argue over what is an impeachable offense, impeachment is inherently a political process. Consequently, political considerations -- e.g. what does the country want and what is best for the nation -- do play a role. The more judicious Republicans -- and there are a few -- fear that the party will take a hit if it speeds ahead of public sentiment. Impeachment cannot occur without beyond-Washington support. Can the Republicans and the chatterers change this context? So far none of their blathering has accomplished that. Will the report sink in, and make the crucial difference? By the time you read this, ask yourself if all that Starr drool has decisively turned opinion? If not, Clinton still has a chance.

Not that he deserves it. He's a scoundrel, personally and policy-wise. Now he has to bounce from one Democratic gathering to the next, apologizing and looking for love in all the safe places. After his initial misstep, he has played the contrition circuit well, calling on God and assorted religious texts. At the White House prayer breakfast on Friday, he pulled off a classy-in-tone Jimmy Swaggert "I have sinned" confession. "Now is the time for turning," he said solemnly, reading from a Jewish Yom Kippur prayer: "Turn us around, oh Lord, and bring us back to you." It was an impressive, masterful performance. Clinton's foes should not underestimate his Southern gothic abilities nor discount how his deliberately poignant remarks might be embraced by a public with little taste for all this jazz. His lawyers' attempt to argue that Clinton did not lie under oath -- that is, his fun-time with Lewinsky did not amount to "sexual relations" -- is absurd and will continue to drive the punditocracy and legislators mad. But how Clinton performs in public will likely have more impact on citizen opinion.

Still, his fellow Dems are stuck. As the elections approach, they gain little from rushing to his side and little from bashing him. (The whacks from Senator Barbara Boxer and others nervous Democrats facing reelection are merely attempts at self-inoculation.) The President has strapped himself to the mast -- he'll take his chances rather than leave the ship -- and has steered his party into the middle of a minefield. There is nowhere to flee. Senator Joseph Lieberman's huffery assailing Clinton may be feel-good rhetoric for self-righteous Democrats, but it does not improve the prospects of a single Democrat up for election.

Weeks ago, my friend Joe Conason, writing in Salon, argued that the right despises Clinton because he had the audacity and moxie to save and revitalize the Democratic Party. Looks more as if Clinton has slowly ruined it. In 1994, Clinton guided his party into a thresher. His putting-markets-first policies did nothing to attract Democratic voters to the polls, and his impossible-to-understand health care plan motivated plenty of angry right-wingers to pull the lever for Republicans. The net result: a complete Republican takeover of Congress. Then in 1996, when House Democrats had a fighting chance to boot Newt, Clinton's sleazy fundraising excesses became public just in time to undermine the party's momentum. The Democrats picked up House seats, but not enough to reclaim the gavel. Now in 1998, Clinton's petty selfishness and his pathetic cover-up efforts have placed his party in jeopardy. The Dems never had much of a chance to bag the eleven seats they need in the House. But the GOP had so bungled its natural advantage -- the party in opposition to a second-term president always makes out in a mid-term congressional elections -- that political handicappers earlier this year could contemplate a possible Democratic victory in the House and not burst out laughing. Forget it. Even if the Republicans overplay their hand regarding the impeachment proceedings, Democrats will be fortunate to keep the seats they currently possess and to stop the Republicans from picking up the five slots they need in the Senate to obtain a filibuster-proof majority -- if only because there's no room in the nation's political discussion for non-Monica topics. Clinton has robbed House Democrats of their fantasy.

Monicagate is almost enough to cause one to pine for the good ol' days of Washington, when a fixer like Clark Clifford would make a few calls and the madness could be capped. Vernon Jordan doesn't have that juice (and the Starr report suggest he's still a potential indictee). Today the capital is nothing but a city of sorry spectacle. Not only do we know too much about the sexual practices of the BMOC, we also know too much about the extramarital affair and out-of-wedlock child of Representative Dan Burton, the number-one Republican Clinton chaser in the House, and we know too much about the private life of Representative Helen Chenoweth, a favorite Republican of the family-values and militia sets. Moreover, there are other sexual bombs to blow on Capitol Hill -- and perhaps elsewhere. (Don't ask me about the whispers about the "second intern.")

Clinton and Starr are both men who cannot contain their excesses. Thanks to one's foul recklessness and the other's zealotry, we're in for an ugly fall, a campaign season even more devoid of substance than usual, a national discourse even more irrelevant to the lives of Americans who do not make a living by spewing on CNN or MSNBC.

David Corn's Loyal Opposition is published weekly in New York Press.