The Week

■ It is indeed the case that Sen. Trent Lott and Rep. Bob Barr have made a practice of addressing a group focused on white self-interest and white power. One day, if this kind of thing spreads, we may have a Congressional Black Caucus.

■ The reasons for calling witnesses before the Senate have to do with law, theater, and propriety. This is a legal process. A judge presides. The senators have sworn oaths (more sincerely, one hopes, than Bill Clinton). Matters of fact as well as of law and politics are on the table, and key testimony has been vague or contradictory. It requires examination. Why did the president give the State of the Union address in person? To make an effect. For the same reason, the key figures in this case should appear in the flesh, not in ring binders. The effect they may have is unpredictable. The sleek Vernon Jordan, the un-sleek Betty Currie, might invoke respect or pity. But many of the House managers are former prosecutors, and many of the senators are lawyers, capable of seeing through evasive testimony—so long as they can see it. Can the Senate afford not to hear witnesses in this case? Senators hear from all kinds of people—number crunchers, tobacco executives, nominees to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. They should in deed question those whose testimony may bring down a president.

Featured Tags

William F. Buckley Jr.

Friedrich Hayek

Taxes

■ It is indeed the case that Sen. Trent Lott and Rep. Bob Barr have made a practice of addressing a group focused on white self-interest and white power. One day, if this kind of thing spreads, we may have a Congressional Black Caucus.

■ The reasons for calling witnesses before the Senate have to do with law, theater, and propriety. This is a legal process. A judge presides. The senators have sworn oaths (more sincerely, one hopes, than Bill Clinton). Matters of fact as well as of law and politics are on the table, and key testimony has been vague or contradictory. It requires examination. Why did the president give the State of the Union address in person? To make an effect. For the same reason, the key figures in this case should appear in the flesh, not in ring binders. The effect they may have is unpredictable. The sleek Vernon Jordan, the un-sleek Betty Currie, might invoke respect or pity. But many of the House managers are former prosecutors, and many of the senators are lawyers, capable of seeing through evasive testimony—so long as they can see it. Can the Senate afford not to hear witnesses in this case? Senators hear from all kinds of people—number crunchers, tobacco executives, nominees to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. They should in deed question those whose testimony may bring down a president.