|
Republicans present four impeachment articles as Democrats push for censure
Updated December 9, 1998
8:20 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (Court TV) — White House Counsel Charles Ruff conceded that "reasonable people" may conclude that President Clinton lied in the Monica Lewinsky affair as Judiciary Committee Republicans distributed four draft articles of impeachment.
Republicans charge the president in a wide-ranging impeachment resolution that charges him with perjury before a federal grand jury, perjury in the Paula Jones case, obstruction of justice and abuse of power.
The resolution accuses the president of lying to the grand jury about the nature of his relationships with Lewinsky, repeating lies he made in the Jones case, repeating false and misleading statements he allowed his lawyer Bob Bennett to make in the Jones case, and lying to the jury about his alleged attempts to influence the testimony of witnesses and impede discovery in the Jones case.
The president is also accused of submitting false affidavits and making perjurious statements in the Jones case.
Obstruction of justice charges relate to:
- The Dec. 17 meeting when Clinton allegedly encouraged Lewinsky to submit a false affidavit and give false testimony to the court in the Paula Jones matter.
- Alleged efforts by the president to get Lewinsky a job to prevent her truthful testimony.
- Allowing Bennett make false statements about Lewinsky's affidavit.
- Alleged false statement Clinton made to his personal secretary Betty Currie, Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles, Deputy White House Counsel Bruce Lindsey, and presidential aide Sidney Blumenthal — potential witnesses — to influence their testimony in the Jones case.
The resolution also states that the president misused and abused his office and impaired the administration of justice by making false public statements in order to deceive the American people. He is charged with abusing his position by making false statements to members of his cabinet and White House aides.
Furthermore, the president is charged with abusing his power by frivolously asserting executive privilege. Clinton's responses to the Judiciary Committee's 81 questions is also tied to the abuse of power article — committee Republicans allege those statements are perjurious, false and misleading to Congress.
Democrats simultaneously drafted a censure resolution that would reprimand Clinton for making "false statements concerning his reprehensible conduct with a subordinate" and alleged he "wrongly took steps to delay discovery of the truth."
The resolution does not recommend that the president pay a fine but notes "the president remains subject to criminal and civil penalties for this conduct" and "fully deserves the censure and condemnation of the American people and the Congress."
Democratic representatives Rick Boucher, D-Va., Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Tx., Tom Barrett, D-Wis., and William Delahunt, D-Mass., called a press conference to say the censure resolution is an attempt to reach out to moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats in the House.
And White House spokesman James Kennedy, responding in a statement to the draft articles, insisted that "nothing in the record, nothing in the facts, or the law, or the Constitution" warrants impeachment.
Hyde, R-Ill., had said he would give dissenting Democrats a committee vote on an alternative proposal for censure.
Barrett said censure would most likely be defeated in the committee, but added that they hoped to bring the alternative to impeachment to the Rules Committee and then onto the House floor.
Before the articles were released, White House Counsel Charles Ruff made a point-by-point defense before lawmakers, carefully choosing his words
and insisting Clinton's testimony about Lewinsky did not amount to perjury because the president believed it to be true, even though Clinton knew others would be misled by his statements.
Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., asked Ruff point blank whether Clinton lied under oath.
"Reasonable people ... could determine that he crossed over that line and that, what for him was truthful and misleading or nonresponsive and misleading or evasive, was, in fact, false," Ruff answered before a hushed House Judiciary Committee.
His concession followed months during which the president's defenders would allow only that Clinton had been misleading.
Still, Ruff argued Clinton's sworn testimony did not constitute perjury, which requires an intent to lie, because the president "believed what he was doing was being evasive but truthful."
"The president has not committed a high crime or misdemeanor. His conduct, although morally reprehensible, does not warrant impeachment," Ruff declared, reiterating arguments made Tuesday by White House Special Counsel Greg Craig.
As Ruff spoke, committee Republicans were completing the drafting of articles of impeachment against Clinton. The committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, asked whether the White House would be amenable to "some intermediate position" short of impeachment to resolve the matter.
"We are open to any reasonable suggestion from any side as a way of finding an end to this," Ruff said.
Jones video testimony will be shown
Hyde also said he intends to talk to GOP colleagues in the House about the case against the president, but would not lobby them to support impeachment. His message will be to "keep their powder dry" until they have all the facts, the chairman said.
He wrote a letter to all House members to "respectfully request that you withhold making any decision" until the committee votes on impeachment and committee members "have had an opportunity to discuss the merits with you."
And in a bold move, Hyde planned to ask the committee to allow his chief investigator, David Schippers, to air Clinton's videotaped deposition in the Paula Jones case in an effort to bolster the GOP case that Clinton lied, committee spokesman Paul McNulty said. The tape, which has never been publicly aired, remains secret under committee rules until the panel votes to make it public.
The hearings played out as the White House seemed to be gaining modest ground in the effort to head off impeachment in the full House. Moderate Republicans Amo Houghton of New York and Christopher Shays of Connecticut said they would oppose impeachment and support censure of the president.
White House aides hoped other moderate lawmakers would follow suit, emboldened, perhaps, by comments made by Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, R-N.Y., on Tuesday that were critical of the drive to impeach.
D'Amato, however, lost his Senate seat to Rep. Charles Schumer (D-NY), who currently sits on the Judiciary Committee, and will not get to present his arguments on the floor.
White House defense team spars with committee members
Ruff disputed Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's conclusions time and again, and told legislators that evidence favorable to Clinton had been "resting in your hands for months" that Starr had elected to leave out of his final report.
Members of the committee listened intently as the president's lawyer spoke. Behind him sat an entire row of the president's defenders, including his personal lawyer, David Kendall. Kendall interrogated Ken Starr during the last impeachment hearing.
In one exchange, Rep. George Gekas, R-Pa., took issue with Ruff's testimony that the nation's founding fathers intended impeachment to be reserved only for treason, bribery and other acts that subvert government.
"To me, bribery as in the Constitution is less destructive of the structure of government than is perjury committed by the president," Gekas interjected passionately.
"I do appreciate your candor and the strength with which you hold that view," Ruff replied, but "the Founding Fathers made a different judgment."
Ruff urged the legislators to seek a balance: "You must ... not set so high a bar as to make it impossible to act when our system of government is threatened. You must not set so low a bar that you encourage future Congresses to set foot on this perilous path when the matter is uncertain and there is a danger that partisan forces alone will tip the balance."
Referring to alleged distortions in the independent counsel's referral and their espousal by committee Republicans, Ruff said "myth appears to have replaced fact."
For instance, he said Clinton had been accused of obstruction of justice for arranging a job for Lewinsky to influence her testimony in the Paula Jones case. But he noted Lewinsky had testified there was no connection between the job search and her testimony in the Jones case, and that her interest in a new job started months before she knew she would be a witness.
Schumer added his support and characterized the reasoning used by Starr to make his case for a charge of obstruction of justice based on Lewinsky's job search as "Kafkaesque."
Ruff used tough language in assessing the president's conduct and acknowledged the criticism by many lawmakers that his defense was based on splitting legal hairs. "I have to plead guilty," Ruff said of the legalisms.
But he said the legal points were relevant and reflect the judgment of lawyers, judges and legislators "that we must take special care in accusing a witness of violating his oath."
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., accused the Republicans of being just as legalistic in the way they argue that perjury has no gradations.
Hyde's decision to allow a vote on censure in committee was largely a gesture, since majority Republicans are certain to defeat it on a party-line vote.
At the same time, it leaves open the question of whether the House GOP leadership will give Democrats a vote on censure when the impeachment issue comes to the floor, as it is expected to do.
Weld, former prosecutors discuss severity of charges
In the committee room, several White House witnesses continued to argue the case against impeachment. Among them was William Weld, a former moderate GOP governor of Massachusetts, who enjoyed a reputation as a tough crime fighter during an earlier career as a prosecutor.
"The most appropriate result is something other than removing this person from his office," said Weld, appearing before the committee as a witness for Clinton. But he said the situation "demands something more than merely censure."
Weld told the committee he had leaned toward impeachment when the Lewinsky matter first broke, but subsequently changed his mind. Weld said the international community seemed ready to forget the matter and carry on its business with Clinton, an indicator that Clinton can still do his job effectively.
"I was concerned that some international events that were happening around then were happening because of a perception of weakness at the core of the executive — of the U.S. government," Weld said.
"But what happens, you know, the week after I deliver myself of these wise sentiments? The president goes to the United Nations and gets a standing ovation. Then he goes into the budget negotiation with members of the opposite party and, by most accounts, gets, you know, better than half a loaf. Then he has the Wye agreements on the Middle East. So it appears to me that people are taking him seriously," he added.
Weld outlined a proposal that included a vote of censure combined with: a written report on Clinton's conduct; written acknowledgment of wrongdoing by the president; a fine paid by Clinton; and leaving open the possibility of criminal prosecution once Clinton leaves office.
Congress, however, can not legally pass a bill of attainder, which mandates a fine for a named person.
The White House said Weld's proposal had not been cleared with the president in advance.
Weld was among five former federal prosecutors who testified today that the case against the president was too weak to be pursued.
The outcome of the committee's impeachment inquiry is not seriously in doubt. 21 Republicans and 16 Democrats sit on the committee; all major votes relating to impeachment matters have followed party lines so far.
Before Ruff spoke, former prosecutors offered testimony disputing the impeachability of perjury, where the allegations are so weak they wouldn't hold up in court.
"If Clinton were a private citizen, the charges "would simply not be given serious consideration for prosecution"' said Thomas P. Sullivan, a former U.S. attorney from Illinois. If the president is not above the law, as he should not be, is he to be treated as below the law?"
One of the final representatives to speak Wednesday night, Lindsey Graham, R-SC, normally a calm questioner who has repeatedly offered to forgive Clinton if if the president would confess his sins, broke into an angry tirade against what he called the "White House spin machine." Staring down Ruff, he accused Clinton and White House staffers of attempting to besmirch Lewinsky's name by floating rumors of her alleged instability and lusty, predatory nature.
Graham said the president's smear campaign, which he insisted would have unleased itself on Linda Tripp if she hadn't secured evidence to protect herself, was more like "Watergate than Peyton Place."
Ruff calmly objected to the "litany of charges never heard before," and said the lateness of their presentation deprived him of a reasonable chance to respond.
Court TV's Bryan Robinson, Aldina Vazao Kennedy and Laurie Gindin, and The Associated Press contributed to this story.
| 
Full Coverage