The House impeachment was cast as the culmination of a partisan witch hunt (though not using that phrase) and the Senate acquittal was characterized as safeguarding democracy and constitutional government.
The former home of Andrew Johnson in Greenville, Tenn. heralds the 17th president -- primarily known for being the first impeached president -- as a “defender of the Constitution.” While it’s not an entirely fawning depiction, it’s assuredly far more positive than most.
Perhaps that’s what you would anticipate from presidential museums — even a modest one such as this. I recently visited this one, but haven’t seen a historical site honoring James Buchanan -- the only president ranking lower than Johnson on C-Span’s recent ranking of presidents, or that of other low rankers for full context.
But it struck me that even in this ultra-woke era, the National Parks Service -- officially the Biden administration – finds a way to celebrate Johnson, who did everything in his power to block Reconstruction-era civil rights laws.
Impeachment as a political weapon
The museum is in the city where Johnson was once mayor enroute to becoming a U.S. congressman, military governor of Tennessee, and the pro-Union Democratic vice president with Republican President Abraham Lincoln, winning on a unity ticket in 1864. He was elevated to the presidency after Lincoln’s assassination.
“The radicals in Congress had long searched unsuccessfully for evidence of criminal charges to bring against President Johnson,” one display in the museum says. “When he defiantly removed the Secretary of War from office in an alleged violation of the Tenure of Office Act, they were convinced the President had committed an impeachable offense.”
Another display reads: “Johnson’s acquittal had great consequences for the future of the United States. Had Johnson been convicted, a dangerous precedent would have been set allowing for the removal of a president from office for trivial reasons such as political unpopularity.”
This is similar to the key point in my book “Abuse of Power,” that places the first Donald Trump impeachment in the historical context of the impeachments of Johnson, Bill Clinton, and the near impeachment of Richard Nixon. Arguing the 2019 impeachment was most comparable to that of Johnson’s in 1868, the book warns of the dangers to the republic of making impeachment just another political weapon.
Johnson becoming more of a villain?
The Johnson museum’s view of a just verdict in the Senate trial has been the general historical consensus, notably when John F. Kennedy hailed Republican Senator Edmund G. Ross in the 1956 book, “Profiles in Courage” for bucking his party and casting the deciding vote to acquit.
However, that view has been evolving in recent years, with books such as “The Impeachers” by Brenda Wineapple in 2020 and the 2009 book “Impeached” by David O. Stewart, that casts the Republicans as the good guys and Johnson as not only a wretched president but a racist obstructing Reconstruction laws. Also, the first season of the excellent dramatized podcast “1865” portrays Johnson as a clear villain.
This museum didn’t seem to entertain a lot for debate on impeachment, as another display read, “Vindicated at Last,” referring to the 1926 Supreme Court decision that ruled the Tenure of Office Act unconstitutional -- just as Johnson argued at the time. The law required the president to get the permission of the Senate before removing any Senate-confirmed official. That the basis for impeachment was unconstitutional is difficult to argue. Though, on the flip side, in sacking War Secretary Edwin Stanton, Johnson did knowingly violate a duly enacted law in place at the time.
Visitors could cast small orange ballots in "Guilty" or "Not Guilty" boxes. Neither were very full, but without counting, it appeared "Not Guilty" ballots carried the day. Arguably, visitors weren’t getting an entirely fair and balanced account on the impeachment clash. But to the credit of the NPS, Johnson’s opposition to civil rights, Black suffrage and the Freedmen's bureau are all documented.
At the same time, there was even something that modern progressives might rally behind, as he was cast as somewhat of a class warrior that “never forgot his working class roots” and “suspected the traditional independence of Americans could be blocked by those of privilege and standing.” In Congress, he was a big proponent of public education and favored eliminating the Electoral College.
Johnson a bad pick, even in 1800s
Still, for those who judge all historical figures by the standards of perfection today, Johnson could never stack up. Moreover, as noted in my book, Johnson had profound shortcomings even by the standards of his own day. By no means does that shun this Greenville shrine. After all -- Woodrow Wilson has an elaborate presidential library in Virginia, and he was worse than his own time on issues of race.
I view Johnson as Lincoln’s worst mistake. It’s clear that the country was worse off for Johnson’s post-Civil War leadership. At the same time, it was rather refreshing to see a dedication to his inspiring personal story of rising from poverty, to becoming a tailor to the nation’s highest office, the only former president to serve in the Senate, and other high points of an unpopular president.
Amid a rabid push to paint the past as an uncompromising politically correct view of good guys and bad guys, the Johnson home is also a reminder of a nuanced history that should be honestly discussed.