Impeachment Proceedings

* I am an independent who will never vote for a Republican for a long, long time if the House votes to impeach President Clinton. There seems to be no way of swaying the House Judiciary Committee from its reckless course. I feel like this committee has commandeered our government and taken away our voice and for that I will never forgive it.

ARTHUR C. BOHART

Long Beach

*

Regarding the continued reprehensible conduct by Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee in the possible impeachment of President Clinton: If they try to remove my president with this farcical coup d’etat, built on the shaky ground of glass-house hypocrisy and trumped-up illegalities, then I, and millions of other law-abiding citizens, will be forced to storm the halls of Congress to restore democracy and the will of the American people. The Constitution guarantees our right to do so.

This country will no longer be an aristocracy of big tobacco, corporate health care, organized religion and the NRA.

JOHN HILL

Mission Hills

*

Question: Why do the president’s lawyers and witnesses remind me of the testimony from the tobacco execs?

WALTER FOSTER

Rolling Hills Estates

*

Your impassioned plea that Congress pursue a course of censure (editorial, Dec. 8) mistakenly assumes that formal chastisement (whatever that means) would constitute an effective rebuke of the president’s behavior. But if Clinton is not bothered by low personal ratings, why should he worry about a congressional statement that carries no consequences?

What is needed now is a reading of how all House members feel about lying under oath. Let the full House vote only on the charge that Clinton lied repeatedly under oath before a federal grand jury. If the vote fails, so be it. What will matter is that those who do not consider perjury to be a grave offense must forever live with their vote being a matter of public record.

WILLIAM S. LaSOR

Lake Forest

*

Though this editorial states that Clinton’s behavior fails the impeachment test, it is mystifying that The Times calls for Congress “to reproach him in the strongest terms.” When did the amendment pass under which one of the equal government branches should reproach or condemn another? Should the president issue a written condemnation of Rep. Henry Hyde for his illicit adultery?

There is no rationale for the Congress to punish a president, or for either branch to punish the judiciary. Clearly the House should immediately drop these proceedings due to lack of evidence of impeachable offenses.

CHARLES S. HOFF

Rancho Palos Verdes

*

I would like to offer the views of a moderate Republican opposed to impeachment. Unfortunately, voters are entirely accustomed to politicians lying. Why else would so many people choose not to vote? Presidents Reagan and Bush lied about the funding and support of the Contras, Clinton lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Both Sen. Trent Lott and Rep. Hyde have shown one set of standards for Republican presidents (Nixon and Reagan) and another for a Democrat.

The Californian elections were marred by the amazing lies and deceptions of both parties. I would really like Washington to take care of the issue of telling the truth and establish in a bipartisan manner a clear, realistic code of conduct (for the president as well as the legislature), with clear sanctions against those who break it. It would be nice to see the Judiciary Committee do this!

As it stands, I would expect the Republicans to be buried in the elections in the year 2000. Each day that Hyde appears on television is another nail in our coffin, not because perjury is OK but because biased partisan judgment is not. Another nail in this coffin is the fear of the aging population regarding the destruction of Social Security.

MIKE STRONG

Corona del Mar

*

The Republicans seem determined to push ahead with impeachment even when there is no chance for a conviction. In 1994, they brought the government to a standstill rather than find a way out of the budget crisis. Once again, they seem determined to shut down the government with a paralyzing display of partisanship.

It seems that beyond wanting to punish President Clinton for his transgressions, they want to punish the country for voting for him. Well, we have, and they should learn to accept that a little more gracefully.

BRAD GOLDBERG

Studio City

*

To people like Jack Braun who think the impeachment issue is about perjury (letter, Dec. 8), all I have to say is, “It’s about the right to privacy, Stupid!” Just because one may loudly demand an answer to a question does not automatically entitle one to an answer, honest or otherwise. I thought we learned this with Joseph McCarthy.

ROBERT FRITSCHE

Long Beach

*

Never mind impeaching Clinton. How do we impeach this Congress and Kenny Starr?

MICHAEL ANDREWS

Woodland Hills