Monitor: Impeachment of a President

US comment on the decision of the House of Representatives to begin an impeachment inquiry
Click to follow
The Independent Culture
The New York Times

THE REAL importance of the vote was that it allows a weighing of the legal and constitutional implications of this much condemned behaviour. By settling on a strategy of personal attacks, lying, and possibly enlisting others in those enterprises rather than settling the Paula Jones lawsuit, Mr Clinton embarked on a course that seriously distended the legal system. His personal privacy was intact until he invited a discovery process in which he knew he would have to dissemble... As the Democrats repeatedly noted, the President has said he is sorry. But the House correctly said that is not enough.


The Dallas Morning News

PRESIDENT CLINTON joined an ignoble list on Thursday. The House of Representatives' decision to allow the House Judiciary Committee to launch an impeachment inquiry against Clinton, places him alongside Nixon and Johnson, both of whom went through stages of impeachment. What a badge of shame. It's not too late for the President to spare the country more protracted turmoil by resigning. If not, the inquiry will begin after the elections. May it be fair and prompt. The public deserves at least that much.


The Washington Post

THE HOUSE made the right decision in authorising an open-ended inquiry into whether Clinton should be impeached. Democrats tried to limit the investigation, arguing that Republicans would abuse the writ. Our instinct is to doubt that. If the Republicans indulge in a standing inquest into the President's behaviour, as a few have threatened, it will be they who pay, with cause, the greater price in terms of public opinion.