Impeachment

As I watched various CNN clips of President Clinton speaking to audiences to promote the concepts outlined in his State of the Union address I noted something extraordinary about the man; he appeared to be glowing. What I mean to say is that the level of self-confidence and sheer energy emanating from the president was so high that it literally took on a light of its own. I can’t be the only one who felt this. For all of his personal shortcomings, Bill Clinton is a truly gifted man who clearly deserves to finish his term in office.

I must admit that the experience turned me around a full 180 degrees. I used to believe it necessary to remove this man from office for the greater good. I don’t believe this anymore. I really don’t see how any good can come from his removal from office. I don’t believe such an act could teach us a lesson we haven’t already learned. Continuing to pursue his removal at this time is for those who are either stubborn or just plain mean.

ARTHUR SAGINIAN

Saugus

*

Re “Witnesses: a Pandora’s Box,” editorial, Jan. 19: What were the framers thinking when they included “and misdemeanors” to the impeachment clause? Did they mean that to be removed a president must commit treason, bribery, a high crime and jaywalk as well? Or did they offer it as a way whereby a president could also be removed for trashing the dignity and honor of his office?

If not the latter, then what misdemeanor rises to the level of treason and bribery, or threatens the security of the nation? And if such a misdemeanor does exist, does not a felony (such as perjury) rise to a higher level?

FRANK BACA

Fallbrook

*

You really have to ask yourself if the Rutherford Institute would have funded Paula Jones, if Ken Starr would have investigated for four years, if Congress would have impeached President Clinton, if he was a Republican?

PETE HAIDINYAK

Irvine

*

Since the Senate can make its own rules, and since everybody is so worried about the impact on the Constitution and what future historians will say, why can’t the Senate declare a 100-year recess for the trial until the historians can figure out the truth? That Senate could then convict or acquit posthumously without emotion. That way we’ll be sure to get it right!

THOMAS CLAUSE

Alhambra