“Members of the Senate have said ‘I understand everything there is about this case, and I won’t vote to impeach the President’. Please allow the facts to do the talking. […] People have made up their mind in a political fashion that will hurt the country long term.”
―Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), on the Clinton impeachment (1998)
“I will do everything I can to make it die quickly.” “I [have] clearly made up my mind […] so I don’t need any witnesses.”
―Also Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), on the Trump impeachment (2019)
On Lindsey Graham
Tuesday, September 29, 2020.
I vividly remember the debate that kicked off the 2020 electoral season in the United States. The very first question asked to then President Donald Trump and former Vice-President Joe Biden dove straight into the hot topic of the day: the push to have Amy Coney Barrett fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat in the Supreme Court, following her death two weeks prior1. Her nomination had been presented to the Senate earlier that day, and the inevitable tug-of-war of US politics ensued: Republicans argued it was their obligation to appoint a Judge while (still) in power; Democrats advocated that the nomination should be postponed until after the elections, that were already underway.
“Why is your position correct on selecting a Supreme Court nominee in an election year?”
The question would ordinarily have been no more than single-issue voter clickbait, were it not for a key precedent: the situation had already presented itself in 2016, when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to fill the Supreme Court seat left by Antonin Scalia’s passing at the very start of that election year. Rather than taking the intractable path of rejecting the nomination simply because they could, the Republican-controlled Senate argued that the nomination should not proceed because it did not respect the Will of the People: during an election year, a sitting President should best wait for his successor to make a choice of this magnitude. And few Republicans were more outspoken about this moral high ground than South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham.
This is him being perfectly clear about his commitment in 2016 2:
“If Ted Cruz or Donald Trump get to be President, they’ve all asked us not to confirm or take up a selection of President Obama; so if a [Supreme Court] vacancy occurs in their last year of their first term, ―guess what?― You’ll use their words against them. I want you to use your words against me: if there’s a Republican President […] and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say ‘Lindsey Graham said: Let’s let the next President […] make that nomination’, and you can use my words against me and you’d be absolutely right. We are setting a precedent here today ―Republicans are― that in the last year […] of […] a 4-year term, that you’re not going to fill the vacancy of the Supreme Court based on what we’re doing here today […]. That’s going to be the new rule.”
Fast-forward four years, and the self-fulfilling prophecy came to fruition in its usual ironic fashion. “Let the next President make that nomination.” Republicans were now bound by their words, and the question that kickstarted this presidential debate put the finger on the crux of political frustration and fatigue brought about by an increasingly dysfunctional two-party system: Accountability. Consistency. Trustworthiness. Commitment to a framework of governance, rather than to short-term political gain.
On Sir Gawain
The past three entries of Applied Mythology have orbited around the myth of Gawain and the Green Knight, a tale where our titular hero ―the gallant Sir Gawain― participates in the wondrous challenge posed by the Green Knight, by which he is prompted to behead his foe with the condition that he should, in turn, be beheaded by him a year later. Despite its horrible film adaptations, the beauty of the story lies in the unwavering resolve that Gawain displays when he sets out to meet his death. After succeeding in several tests of virtue, but failing in one (not disclosing the acquisition of a magical green sash that would protect him against the Green Knight’s strike), Gawain reaches his foe and accepts his death blow, only to be spared with the reminder that while he may be morally righteous, he is still flawed.
The foundational theme of this myth is subject to much debate. While it’s generally regarded as a Christianized story about defending virtue in the face of temptation, my take is that this is a treatise on medieval law, or what it means to create a binding agreement using only one’s word, in times where there were no notaries in England3. The contract that Gawain signs with the Green Knight at the beginning of the tale binds its two protagonists beyond any questions or claims, and is impossible to renounce because it bears the entirety of King Arthur’s court as witnesses. Despite it being verbal, the two clauses that Gawain accepts live in the memories of the Knights of the Round Table: First, that Gawain is entitled to strike the Green Knight’s head with his axe, effective immediately. Second, that the Green Knight ―should he survive― will be entitled to reciprocate the blow in a year’s time, at the Green Chapel.
Having agreed to these terms, the story does not present a single instance of hesitancy in the enactment of this contract. It concludes when Gawain finally reaches the Green Chapel and accepts the blow, despite wearing a green sash that would allow him to survive. Although Gawain obtained this magical item by succumbing to temptation, the story has a happy ending: the terms of his contract with the Green Knight ―the one witnessed by Arthur’s court― were fulfilled to a tee. Gawain’s flaw, in any case, lies in the breaking of a second, minor contract around the acquisition of that sash ―one with fewer witnesses and of lesser rank― which helps him keep his resolve to uphold the higher contract with the Green Knight, to which he is publicly beholden.
On the Green Knight and the American People
Graham: “Now, I’ll tell you this: […] If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term and the primary process has started, we’ll wait till the next election. And I’ve got a pretty good chance of being in the Judiciary―"
Goldberg: “You’re on the record.”
Graham: “Yeah. Hold the tape.”
―Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), doubling-down on his commitment to not appoint a Supreme Court judge during an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic on October 8, 2018 4.
The first presidential debate of 2020 would be reviled for its dismal level of argumentation. Trump, Biden and Fox News conductor Chris Wallace would all be mocked for the event’s unruliness; the second debate would be cancelled and the third would have the lowest rating in recent history.
As expected, when asked about the Republican party’s rushed nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump altogether bypassed the party’s explicit commitment not to do just that by saying that, if he has the power to do so, he can ―and should― in the name of his constituents. No need to bring up his party’s promise to do otherwise.
While Trump’s rationale hardly surpassed that of a playground bully (“it’s my ball so I get to be captain”), the bigger disappointment of the night was Joe Biden’s clumsy riposte. Unsurprisingly, Biden failed to even mention the Republican Party’s contradiction and instead, pivoted into a fearmongering claim that the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett would lead to the repeal of the Affordable Care Act which he championed under the Obama presidency; a claim that was both unsubstantiated and that missed the larger point.
A two-party system can only function when the parties work together for the benefit of the People they collectively represent. Political negotiation should be managed in terms of how to get things done policy-wise, not by undermining the rules they both commit themselves to when these do not align with their short-term interests.
For a candidate who ran on the promise of uniting Americans, Biden and his Democrat debate coaches were awfully blind in making this opening response about Obamacare, of all things. The Amy Coney Barrett question was a near perfect opportunity for Biden to remind Trump that both Republicans and Democrats work to serve the same People, and that the fundamentally debatable issue around the nomination was not about partisanship, but about how back-stepping on their word undermined and polluted the principles of governance that both parties were bound to, regardless of whether it’s the Constitution, one’s public promise, or the powerful gesture of a simple handshake that any American can relate to.
“You can use my words against me and you’d be absolutely right…” Instead, Republicans went off into logical gymnastics to show how things were different this time around, while Democrats heralded the death of Obamacare. The contradiction ceases to exist when it isn’t even valued enough to be mentioned on stage, in front of the national audience that bore witness to it four years ago.
And the Green Knight ―the People― waits alone in the Green Chapel. Not only did the American Gawain fail to show up entirely; he and his fellow knights can still be found in court, bragging about how getting beheaded is dumb and pointless and not their obligation as a ruling class.
On October 26, Sen Lindsey Graham voted to confirm Amy Coney Barrett into the Supreme Court.
"Merrick Garland was a different situation. You had the president of one party nominating, and you had the Senate in the hands of the other party. A situation where you've got them both would be different. I don't want to speculate, but I think appointing judges is a high priority for me in 2020."
―Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Full Court Press with Greta Van Susteren
Cue out with The Monkees covering That was Then, This is Now (1986).
Coming up next: We will close the cycle of Gawain and the Green Knight as we bridge it to the beginning of the Arabian Nights.
And a fun fact: The myth of Gawain and the Green Knight can be traced back to the story of “Bricriu’s Feast”, from the Ulster Cycle of Irish mythology. All-time hero Cúchulainn and his rivals Conall Cernach and Lóegaire Búadach are challenged by a giant to cut off his head on the condition that they allow theirs to be cut off in return. Although all three accept the challenge, only Cúchulainn returns the next day to receive his death stroke, rendering him the champion of the game and the most honorable of living heroes.
Unlike continental Europe heavily influenced by the Vatican, the first notarized document registered in England dates from the 13th century, far after the placement of Arthurian history. See: A History of the Notary – England