Impeachable Offenses

WASHINGTON -- Some senators in both parties said yesterday that the Senate would have been far more likely to allow witnesses to testify in person at President Clinton's trial if the Republican prosecutors had called witnesses during the House impeachment proceedings.The senators' remarks suggested that the prosecutors made a tactical error in deciding not to summon any witnesses for the House Judiciary Committee hearings last fall. The House Republicans instead relied primarily on evidence compiled by independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr.

WASHINGTON -- When Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist closed his red notebook for the last time Friday, proclaiming, "Our work as a court of impeachment is now done," he committed to history the judgment of whether the Constitution's meaning had undergone any change in the process. Sun staff writer Lyle Denniston explores some of the constitutional questions raised by the nation's second presidential impeachment and trial.Is it clear now how serious presidential conduct must be in order to justify conviction and removal from office?

NOW that President Clinton's spokesman has promised that his boss won't throw a victory party when the impeachment trial is over -- now that the White House has been declared a "gloat-free zone" -- maybe the Senate will finally find a way to call a halt to this futile exhibition of political tap-dancing.After much talk about a plan to approve a "finding of fact" that would enable the Senate to pronounce Mr. Clinton guilty of impeachable offenses without actually convicting him, it is now obvious that the proposal was primarily a product of certain senators' preoccupation with Mr. Clinton's penchant for dancing in the end zone.

WASHINGTON -- With the political fate of President Clinton now shifting to the Senate for trial, some significant changes will occur in the deliberations, mostly in his favor.Most importantly, two-thirds (67 senators) is required for conviction. With 45 Democrats in the Senate, the prospect, at the outset at least, must be rated slim to none. If the 55 Republicans voted as a bloc, 12 Democrats would have to break with their party's president to remove him from office.The near-solidarity shown against impeachment by House Democrats for a president whose personal actions they readily condemned demonstrated how GOP partisanship had stiffened Democratic resolve.

UNFORTUNATELY, the paucity of debate among the Framers over the nature of an impeachable offense leaves us with little guidance as to what might be considered grounds for impeachment. Looking elsewhere, we find two possible sources of guidance: England, and the colonial experience.In February 1974, the House of Representatives' Committee on the Judiciary published a report by the Staff of Impeachment Inquiry titled "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment." To better understand the Framers' intent, the Inquiry examined the history of impeachment in England, noting Alexander Hamilton's statement that "Great Britain had served as the model from which [impeachment]

DUBLIN, Ireland -- After several weeks of avoiding the word and under mounting criticism from leaders in his party, President Clinton said yesterday that he was "sorry" for his conduct in the Monica Lewinsky matter.Clinton's comments came one day after Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, delivered a forceful speech from the Senate floor in which he called the president's actions "immoral," "disgraceful" and deserving of formal public rebuke.During a photo opportunity yesterday with Irish Premier Bertie Ahern, Clinton said, "I've already said that I made a bad mistake, it was indefensible, and I'm sorry about it."

SINCE ITS publication May 1 by The Sunday Times of London, the so-called Downing Street memo has dominated the media in Britain and on the Internet in the United States. The memo is the official minutes from a secret meeting about Iraq held by British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his inner circle July 23, 2002. The significance of the memo - and additional leaked British documents now surfacing in public view - can hardly be overstated. They conceivably could lead to impeachment proceedings against President Bush.

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Constance A. Morella's autumn of indecision ended late last night as the moderate Montgomery County Republican declared she would vote against impeaching a popular Democratic president whose policies she has often supported."

WASHINGTON -- Americans who try to access Kenneth W. Starr's report on the Monica Lewinsky matter via the Internet may well face a traffic jam that could make rush hour on the Jones Falls Expressway seem as placid as an empty beach."

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans began searching yesterday for a way out of the impeachment process against President Clinton, even as the most conservative GOP members of the Judiciary Committee sounded as uncompromising as ever.Republican losses in last week's election and the resulting ouster of House Speaker Newt Gingrich have drastically altered the political landscape, leaving the Judiciary Committee stuck with a mission that some Republican members no longer want to undertake."There are clearly guys on this committee and in this [Republican]