In this story:

• Rep. King: GOP pushes impeachment at its peril
• GOP critics see Clinton's answers as evasive
• 'Surprise' Clinton hasn't made more vigorous defense
• Clinton admits misleading family, staff, country

WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, November 29) -- Some Republicans disappointed by President Bill Clinton's answers to 81 questions from the House Judiciary Committee about the Monica Lewinsky affair say Clinton must be more forthcoming if he wants Congress to consider censure as an alternative to impeachment.

"This censure idea, without an admission on the president's part, is a political cop-out," said Rep. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I do not want to have an unrepentant perjurer leading the nation into the 21st century."

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) called for the president to be questioned directly in a personal appearance on Capitol Hill.

King

"I think he ought to have to answer questions and be subject to examination, because the answers that he gave were evasive," Specter said on "Fox News Sunday." "Let's bring the president in."

But Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican who has come out for censure and against impeachment, said Sunday that there are not enough votes in the full House to impeach Clinton -- and that the GOP is pursuing that course at its own peril.

"It's going to make it harder to get our agenda across. We have to show that we can lead, that we can bring an end to this," he said on "Meet The Press."

However, House Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas, who opposes censure as unsatisfactory and extraconstitutional, took issue with King's analysis that the full House won't approve articles of impeachment.

"I respect his opinion, but I don't respect his ability to count votes," DeLay said on CNN's "Late Edition." He said censure would merely be "a piece of paper."

On Sunday, Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, one of the first Democrats to openly condemn Clinton's behavior, called for censure in an essay in the New York Times.

Clinton admits misleading family, staff, country

He said Congress needs to make "a strong statement that makes clear to ourselves and posterity that we are a nation that understands the difference between right and wrong, truth and falsehood."

GOP critics are complaining that Clinton's responses, which were released Friday, were evasive, incomplete and did not offer much of a defense against charges lodged in an impeachment referral from Independent Counsel Ken Starr.

"(In) not one of those 81 answers could he bring himself to answer simply 'yes' or 'no,'" said Rep. Bob Barr, a Georgia Republican on the Judiciary Committee and one of Clinton's harshest critics, in an interview with CNN.

"He is so afraid of answering questions directly that even when they asked him about his oath of office, whether he took this particular oath of office, he couldn't simply say 'yes.' He had to explain it in the third person," Barr said.

Judiciary Committee member Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-Arkansas) said Clinton's answers could have been "an opportunity for the president to accept responsibility for any false statements."

"That opportunity was declined," said Hutchinson, who is considered to be one of a small number of GOP members on the committee who might possibly break ranks and support censure instead of impeachment.

One top Republican aide, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity, said that even the smallest admission of wrongdoing by Clinton in his answers would have made it easier for Republican moderates to negotiate an end to the politically unpopular impeachment process.

Hyde

"I detect among (committee members) disappointment and surprise that the president isn't mounting a more vigorous defense," the aide said, adding that without such a defense, articles of impeachment are all but certain to be approved by the committee and reach the House floor.

Barr said Clinton's answers "will be used by our staff, our lawyers and our investigators to buttress the case that the president in fact did perjure himself on many occasions."

However, one White House official called the GOP criticism predictable, adding that Clinton was in a no-win situation.

While deviating from earlier statements might have given one Republican room to maneuver away from supporting impeachment, "it would have handed eight others something new to hit Clinton over the head with," the official told The Associated Press, on condition of anonymity.

On Sunday, White House spokesman Jim Kennedy said Clinton "made a good-faith effort to respond to the questions despite the fact that they were designed more for a partisan purpose than a constitutional one."

A Clinton defender on the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York) said Clinton's answers "as expected told us nothing new."

"I thought they were exactly as direct as they could be given the fact that they're ... a legal deposition, and any lawyer will tell any client to be very careful in his answers under oath," Nadler said in an interview with CNN. "I think it reads as any statement under oath would."

"Anyone who thought the president should be impeached beforehand will still think so, and anyone who thought the president should not be impeached will think that," Nadler said.

In his written answers submitted Friday, Clinton acknowledged once again that he misled his family, his staff, his friends and the American public.

But in several responses to the questions submitted by Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde three weeks ago, Clinton said his testimony was "not false and misleading."

At the same time, he failed to recall many of the significant events in his relationship with Lewinsky, a former White House intern.

Asked to admit or deny he spoke with Oval Office secretary Betty Currie about gifts he gave to Lewinsky, Clinton said, "I never told Betty Currie to take possession of gifts I had given Ms. Lewinsky."

He also insisted, "I did not tell Ms. Lewinsky to lie, and I did not tell anybody to lie about my relationship with Ms. Lewinsky."

Many of the questions asked the president to "admit or deny" specific events or conversations. He usually was not as direct in his answers, and in at least 17 instances said he did not recall or his recollection was uncertain.

Clinton preceded his responses with a personal statement, asking for a "speedy and fair resolution" to the matter, which he said "long ago ceased to be primarily a legal or political issue and became instead a painful personal one."

Hyde has given Clinton an opportunity to either appear personally before the committee or send a legal representative to appear on his behalf and call witnesses. A tentative date for the appearance was set for December 8.

Kennedy said Sunday that the White House is still evaluating the invitation from Hyde.

The president's personal lawyer, David Kendall, has indicated he will be sending a memorandum to the committee, which is expected to make a detailed argument that nothing brought before the committee so far rises to the level required to impeach a president.

Correspondent Carl Rochelle contributed to this report.

Sunday, November 29, 1998

• Clinton's answers to impeachment questions intensify censure debate
• Reno faces decision on Ickes investigation

ARCHIVES

Search CNN/AllPolitics by           Enter keyword(s)       go    help