Deadlock Read online

  Toni Ridge looked as if she’d been caught stealing files from her law firm. Helen Forbes Kensington looked at the grass.

  “I think it’s time somebody told me what’s really going on,” Millie said.

  Levering threw up his hands. “I agree. Let’s go.”

  7

  “Listen,” Sam Levering said. “This whole thing has gone far enough. You want to stay on the Court, you make a pledge right now.”

  They were in the limo heading back to the Court building. Helen sat silently by, looking out the window.

  Millie fought hard to keep from throwing something – a decanter of booze from the bar would be fitting – at the senator’s face. “How dare you,” she said.

  “Oh, please,” Levering said. “Spare me your outrage. You’ve got a decision to make right now. I’m not gonna sit around while you mess up the Court.”

  Mess up! Getting a lecture on messing up from Sam Levering was too much to bear. Oh, God, what do I say?

  Helen turned toward her. “Millie, what the senator and I are trying to do is help you remember what it is we’ve been fighting for all these years, for the right of women – ”

  “Stop,” Millie said. “I don’t want to hear it. Helen, how could you?”

  “I’ll tell you how,” Levering said. “The fundamentalists are shouting hosannas about your conversion. Or haven’t you heard? They’re already writing Roe off the books.”

  “How can either of you think I’d listen to any outside influence?” Millie’s heart was making its way to her throat, pounding with outrage. “Including yours?”

  Helen sighed. “Millie – ”

  “Hold it,” Levering snapped. “Just hold it now and let me do the talking.” His face swiveled toward Millie. “Let’s cut to the chase, shall we? Here is the way it is. You will check with me on the big votes, the big cases, from now on. I will tell you what to do.”

  Millie’s hands curled in on themselves, her nails pressing flesh. “Are you insane?”

  “Been called a lot of things in my time. Insane is pretty tame.”

  “I would never,” Millie said, pausing to choose her words carefully, “ever consider compromising the workings of the Court, or my own independence, for anyone, let alone you. You are a United States senator with an oath of office. How do you look at yourself in the morning?”

  “With these eyes,” Levering said, passing his fingers in front of his face. “I can see things, you know. I can see the future. Want me to tell you yours?”

  Anger kept Millie’s mouth closed while she waited.

  “You refuse to take my direction,” Levering continued, “and I walk over to the House and get a little investigation going. Impeachment, Madame Justice.” He drew the last word out so it sounded like Just-ess.

  He was insane. Threatening impeachment as a form of extortion? Right here in his own limousine, with Helen sitting in silence, without protest.

  “You can’t possibly succeed with an impeachment,” she said. “The country won’t stand for it. Congress won’t stand for it.”

  “Don’t you remember what Bierce said? The Congress is a masquerade of principles, Madame Justice, and I can manipulate that particular masquerade.”

  “You have no grounds for impeachment.”

  Levering’s smile was sickening. “You have no idea.” He leaned forward, raising a warning finger. “This is a promise. You give me your answer by tomorrow. You don’t, and I will rain fire and brimstone on you. And you can take that to the bank, Saint Millicent Mannings Hollander.”

  8

  Millie’s head was practically bursting with anger when she got to Bill Bonassi’s house. Night was hovering over D.C. and several times she thought she’d faint in the taxi. The world was spinning out of control, out of the realm of reality. She needed Bonassi’s counsel now.

  They met in his study as Dorothy went to brew some tea. The room was primarily floor-to-ceiling bookcases, the Old Lion’s den.

  “Tell me about it,” he said.

  She managed to tell him everything without breaking down. He sat, listening patiently, not interrupting her once.

  When she finished Bonassi took a long pause before answering. “Mark Twain said there is no distinctly American criminal class, except Congress.”

  It was the right comment, lightening the pressure just a bit.

  Millie blurted, “I never thought I’d be in a position like this. What do I do?”

  “Get a lawyer,” Bonassi said.

  “Do you know anyone?”

  Bill Bonassi raised his hand. “Why not let me take a crack at it?” he said.

  “You?”

  “Dottie says I’m spending too much time with my garden. I’m driving her nutty.”

  “But I couldn’t ask you…”

  “You don’t have to,” Bonassi said. “I’m signing up. Pro bono publico. We can’t let the Leverings of this world spread their poison, not on the steps of the Court. I want in, Millie, if you’ll have me.”

  Now there were definite tears in her eyes, and she didn’t stop them. “Thank you. I don’t know what else to say.”

  “No need to say anything.” Bonassi stood up, and suddenly looked twenty years younger. Excitement seemed to pour out of his skin. “Here are the ground rules. We’ll do everything by prayer and the law. In that order. Agreed?”

  A rush of relief came to Millie like a cool breeze. “Agreed.”

  Bonassi rubbed his hands together. “I’ll make a little call to our senator friend and let him know exactly what I think of his proposition. I’ll do your public speaking. You say nothing until your moment.”

  “My moment?”

  Bonassi nodded. “There comes a time in every trial for the moment. It may be on the floor of the United States Senate, when they try your case. Are you prepared to go all the way?”

  Her heart was beating rapidly. “All the way, Bill.”

  “Good. We’ll know the time you should speak.”

  “I hope so.”

  “No,” Bonassi said gently. “You’ll pray so. You’re a Christian now, with all the privileges of a child of God. One of those is prayer. We’ll need it. This is a spiritual battle.”

  “I have a suggestion,” he continued. “Let’s pray for Sam Levering.”

  9

  The Senate dining room had two sections. One was for members and guests, the other – called the inner sanctum – was for senators alone. Sam Levering was eating his usual – bourbon and bean soup – when the maitre d’ informed Levering a cop wanted to see him.

  “Can you make this short?” Levering said to the cop, who said his name was Markey. “I’ve got an appropriation rider to propose in” – he looked at his watch – “twenty minutes.”

  “I’ll get right to it, then,” Markey said, sitting opposite Levering. “There’s been a disappearance. I was hoping you could shed some light on it.”

  “What sort of light would that be?”

  “Just the facts.”

  Levering could not help rolling his eyes. “Don’t foul up my air with platitudes, will you, boy?” He hadn’t meant it in a racial way, but that’s the way it sounded. Well, too bad.

  Markey did not look upset. In fact, he looked a little like that actor, what was his name, Denzel Washington. Why wasn’t this guy out making movies instead of harassing senators?

  “I am conducting an investigation, sir,” Markey said, “and I would appreciate your cooperation.”

  “Ask your questions and then leave.”

  Markey took out a pad and pen. “Do you know anything about a homeless man named Elijah?”

  “Sounds like a Bible story.”

  “That was his street name, sir.”

  “Never heard of the guy. Why would I?”

  “Your aide, Anne Deveraux, knew him.”

  Levering’s skin began to itch. “What’s Anne got to do with this?”

  “Hasn’t she ever mentioned this man?” Markey asked.

  �
��Some homeless man? No.” The booze was helping him keep calm. What did this detective know, anyway?

  “She had an encounter with this man,” Markey said.

  “Look, her private life is her private – ”

  “I don’t mean that kind of encounter,” the cop interrupted. “She sprayed him with mace.”

  Plausible deniability. It would save him again. “I have no idea what you’re alluding to. If you’re trying to connect me with this man, whoever he is, and something Anne did in her off time, it’s just not going to fly.”

  “Funny,” Markey said.

  “What is?”

  “Oh, just the way Ms. Deveraux spoke about your working relationship. How close it was. You’d think she would have mentioned an incident like that to her boss.”

  “Well,” Levering said, “she didn’t.” He looked for a waiter. That second Jim Beam was calling. Steady.

  “So your official statement is that you have no knowledge of the whereabouts of this man Elijah?” Markey asked.

  “You do pretty good cop-speak. They teach you that?”

  “No.” Markey put his pen and pad back in his coat pocket. “My father did.”

  “Really now? Your daddy a cop?”

  “Preacher.”

  For some reason Levering felt sweat seeping into his collar.

  “Isn’t that nice,” Levering said. “Your daddy teach you to interrupt citizens with pointless questions?”

  The cop’s demeanor did not change. “May I have your permission to speak plainly?”

  Odd request from a detective. “Sure.”

  Markey said. “I have a feeling about this case. Maybe it has something to do with you, Senator, and maybe not. Maybe it has something to do with Ms. Deveraux, and maybe not. But if my feeling is correct, some bad things are going down around here. And I will find out what they are.”

  Levering was brought up short. Not because of his brashness, but because of the seeming sincerity with which this detective spoke. Like he knew things he had no way of knowing. Levering inhaled, trying to keep himself as calm as possible.

  “Is that the end of your sermon?” Levering responded.

  “Amen,” Markey said.

  “Then get out.”

  With a curt nod, the detective turned and walked out of the inner sanctum. Levering waited a moment, then yelled to the waiter for another drink.

  CHAPTER FIFTEEN

  1

  New York Times

  Wednesday, November 12

  A request for an impeachment investigation of Chief Justice Millicent Mannings Hollander has been officially lodged in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Leigh Barbaros, a California Democrat.

  Rumors of such a move have been circulating throughout the Capitol for days. The investigation seeks to delve into the veracity of Hollander’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in light of recent revelations of a religious conversion that could tip the delicate balance of the nation’s highest court.

  The request will be reviewed by the House Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Constitution. If the subcommittee determines there is merit to the charges, Articles of Impeachment will be drawn. The full Judiciary Committee must approve the Articles before they are sent to the full House for a vote. A simple majority is all that is required to approve the Articles and send the matter to the Senate for trial.

  “It’s not that we’re against someone converting,” one congressman, who requested anonymity, said. “But if it is in complete disagreement with what you swore to when approved, it bears looking into. Especially if it could mean a completely different Supreme Court.”

  Since 1936, the House has initiated seven impeachment investigations. Only one involved a Supreme Court justice. In 1970 an investigation into the actions of Justice William O. Douglas fell short of the filing of formal charges by the House. The last House impeachment was against President Bill Clinton, which resulted in a Senate trial and acquittal.

  THE BURROW BULLETIN

  Hollander to Be Impeached!

  The House of Representatives, currently investigating Chief Justice Millicent Mannings Hollander, already has the votes to impeach! While the official request for an investigation is just in a preliminary stage, sources Burrowing in on the story tell me an impeachment (which is just like a grand jury indictment from the House) is a done deal. “This lady’s toast,” one Burrower said.

  “There’s a whole bunch of stuff no one knows about yet,” this Burrower continues. “It’s really going to get hot.”

  The Burrow Bulletin will keep its readers updated. But look out! Gloves are reportedly about to come off.

  TRANSCRIPTS/LarryKingLive

  KING: Tonight, a distinguished panel discusses the impeachment investigation surrounding the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Joining us, from Boston, professor of Constitutional Law at Yale University Law School, Lawrence I. Graebner. In Washington, retired justice of the Supreme Court, the Honorable William T. Bonassi; joining me here in Los Angeles is Rebecca Margullis, President of the National Organization for Women. And they are all next on LARRY KING LIVE.

  Good evening. The impeachment of a Supreme Court justice, the chief justice in fact, is a distinct possibility tonight. Professor Graebner, I’ll start with you. What do you make of it?

  GRAEBNER: Well, Larry, the Constitution gives the people of the United States, through its representative bodies, the power to impeach federal judges. Since the federal judiciary enjoys lifetime tenure, this is the only procedure for removal at our disposal.

  KING: For high crimes and misdemeanors.

  GRAEBNER: No, no. That is the standard for the impeachment of civil officers. The president, vice president, and so on. The standard for judges is found in Article III, Section I, and states that judges, both of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, shall hold their seats during good behavior.

  KING: So what’s good behavior?

  GRAEBNER: The real question is what is bad behavior.

  KING: Okay. What’s bad behavior then?

  GRAEBNER: Well, as Gerald Ford said when he was in Congress, and proposed impeaching Justice William O. Douglas, an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.

  MARGULLIS: And that’s right now, Larry.

  KING: We’ll get to you in a moment, Rebecca. I wanted to ask Justice Bonassi what he thinks of that. Justice Bonassi, it’s an honor to have you on the program.

  MARGULLIS: Can I just ask a question?

  KING: Rebecca, we’ll get to you. Go ahead, Justice Bonassi.

  BONASSI: Thank you, Larry. With all due respect to Professor Graebner, the House is undertaking what can only be described as a witch hunt. A person’s personal religious beliefs are being questioned, as if they were some sort of crime.

  MARGULLIS: When it comes to a woman’s right to choose, there is -

  KING: Rebecca, just a moment, please.

  BONASSI: What? What did she say?

  KING: You go ahead, Justice Bonassi.

  BONASSI: I was saying that this is not a proper standard for impeachment. The framers never meant this power to be abused in this way. They did not want inquisitions for personal views.

  GRAEBNER: If I may, an inquiry into personal views is what the confirmation process is supposed to be. But when a judicial candidate lies to the committee, that is surely grounds for later removal.

  KING: Rebecca Margullis, you -

  BONASSI: Wait, wait a second, Larry. We’ve just heard a scurrilous charge from the professor. You can’t seriously be suggesting that the chief justice was intentionally lying to the Judiciary Committee. We need proof, Professor Graebner, as you no doubt tell your first-year students.

  GRAEBNER: There’s plenty of proof. We have her testimony. And as the House investigation proceeds, I am sure more will be coming out.

  BONASSI: That is an absolutely outrageous statement
-

  MARGULLIS: Larry -

  BONASSI: – an affront not only to our system, but to the reputation of a fine justice who has served this country with absolute integrity and dignity.

  MARGULLIS: Larry -

  KING: Rebecca Margullis in Los Angeles, what’s your take on all this?

  MARGULLIS: Millicent Mannings Hollander must go, Larry.

  THE NATIONAL EXPOSURE

  Pics Show Justice in Arms of Minister!

  Is She Seeking Help with an Alcohol Problem?

  BY DAN RICKS

  There is a “smoking gun” in the House investigation into Chief Justice Millicent Mannings Hollander.

  Smoking gun? Maybe a whole arsenal of hot weapons!

  A source close to the investigation says this is “the most incriminating stuff since Monica’s dress.”

  Included in this pile of inculpatory items are several photographs taken in California during Hollander’s supposed convalescence. Instead of healing her head, she was apparently head over heels… with a fundamentalist Christian minister!

  The question they’re asking on the Hill is this: Do we want the chief justice of our Supreme Court, the one who will be instrumental in decisions regarding abortion, church and state, privacy, and so on, in lip lock with a minister? Especially a minister who is rabidly anti-abortion?

  That’s right. The Reverend Jack Holden once did time in the clink – after trying to shut down a family planning clinic!

  But that’s not the worst of the trouble for the chief justice.

  According to a reliable source, the accident then Associate Justice Hollander was involved in a few months ago was the result of alcohol abuse! The story is that Hollander was out on the town with a well-known politico, had a bit too much to drink, and ran off from the limo they were sharing – right into oncoming traffic! Apparently no one at the hospital thought to test a Supreme Court justice for blood alcohol content.

  The story is confirmed by the driver of this politico’s limousine, by the way.