Debate on accusatory articles could lead to Clinton impeachment

The prospect of impeachment draws closer for President Clinton today as a congressional committee begins debating four articles…

The prospect of impeachment draws closer for President Clinton today as a congressional committee begins debating four articles accusing him of perjury, obstruction of justice and abuse of power.

A vote on the articles published last night will take place by the weekend. The Republican majority on the judiciary committee of the House of Representatives is expected to approve at least three of the articles which would then be sent to the full House for a vote next week.

The Democrats on the committee produced a draft motion of censure as an alternative to the impeachment articles. The language in the motion is harshly critical of Mr Clinton's behaviour over his affair with Ms Monica Lewinsky. It describes him of having "violated the trust of the American people, lessened their esteem for the Office of President and dishonoured the office which they have entrusted to him". The motion would also oblige Mr Clinton to sign the condemnation.

The White House is intensifying efforts to head off an impeachment vote in the House by lobbying so-called moderate Republicans to come out in favour of a censure motion. The President might also be prepared to pay a stiff fine, the members of Congress are being told.

READ MORE

If the impeachment articles are debated in the House next week, Mr Clinton will be the second President in history to endure this humiliation. President Andrew Johnson was impeached in 1868 but was saved from conviction in the Senate by one vote. President Richard Nixon resigned in August 1974 as soon as articles of impeachment were sent to the House as he was assured that there was not enough support for him.

The arithmetic this time in the House is against Mr Clinton as the Republicans have a 22-vote majority, but if about 12 of these can be persuaded to vote for censure instead, the impeachment motion would probably fail. Even if the President is impeached in the House, there seems little chance that he would be convicted in the Senate where a two-thirds majority would be needed, but the prospect of him facing a trial where details of his affair with Ms Lewinsky would be aired all over again is alarming the White House.

The draft articles of impeachment were released as the President's counsel, Mr Charles Ruff, ended a long day defending Mr Clinton before the judiciary committee. Mr Ruff admitted that the President in his testimony to the grand jury and in the Paula Jones civil suit had been "evasive and misleading", but he insisted that he had not committed perjury.

Asked by Republican Mr James Sensenbrenner if the President had lied, Mr Ruff replied: "Reasonable people . . . could determine that he crossed over that line and that what for him was truthful but misleading or non-responsive and misleading or evasive was, in fact, false, but in his mind - and that's the heart and soul of perjury - he thought and he believed that what he was doing was being evasive but truthful." Mr Ruff told the committee there was absolutely no possibility that the President would pardon himself before he left office or accept a pardon afterwards for alleged offences. Mr Ruff also urged the alternative of a strongly worded censure.

Mr William Delahunt, a Democrat member of the committee who co-authored the censure motion, said: "This may be our last opportunity to avoid going over the precipice and triggering a genuine constitutional crisis."

He said that while the Republicans on the committee would probably vote against the censure motion, he hoped it could be tabled in the full House where it could appeal to more moderate Republicans who shrink from impeachment of a popular president.

Constitutional experts have warned that a trial in the Senate could last for months and paralyse the public life of the country.