Is Impeachment Realistic

Re: Ras Siddique

I tend to disagree. Bill Clinton is the one who is at fault here. He could have told the truth on January 17 when this story first broke, but he did not. He had a chance in August of this year, but he missed it and recently, he was evasive about his responsibilites as the President in answering the questions posed to him by the Congress. This man has NEVER TOLD THE TRUTH to the American people.

The American people do not elect their leaders to have private and personal lives. It is to serve them. If you want that, don`t run for office. If you had sex with your intern, in your office, and it was discovered, do you think you could hold your job? Bill Clinton is the paid employee of the American people and we do not like our employees to have oral sex while doing the nation`s business. The Oval Office is not a private office, but it is a public office paid for by the taxpayer. If Bill Clinton wanted to have sex with Lewinsky, he should have taken her to his private rooms in the Residency. This man was having sex while discussing possible deployments of American troops to Bosnia ! How would a Pakistani mother father feel if Nawaz Sharif, in deciding their son`s future on Siachen, was having sex with some begum?

I am an avid history buff of World War Two and have known and talked with many veterans and I fully agree with Bob Dole`s question, ``where is the outrage?``

As to your dismay over the American lack of interest on issues affecting Pakistan; most Americans do not care what happens outside of their state, let alone in a primitive country like Pakistan...by the way where is Pakistan...is it not a suburb of India ? American foreign policy will not lose any sleep thinking about Pakistan and we, Pakistanis, should get over the false idea that America cares about us. It will only care about us when it wants something from us. As one of my friends told me, ``who wants to care and who gives a damn.`` This was around the time when the nuclear weapons were tested and his basic attitude was that the US should nuke both the countries and get on with other important things.

As to Clinton, I support impeachment, because that is only way the truth will come out. Also, please understand that the article(s) of impeachment of Clinton, by congress, does not mean a removal from office, but merely that there will a trial in the Senate. If congress does vote on the article(s) of impeachment this next week, it only means that this thing will be in the hands of the Senate to decide either ways. The final senate vote (Demos have 45 seats and the GOP has 55 seats and the moderate swing votes) will determine if he is removed from office or not.

The reason that most Americans have not formed an opinion on this issue is, because they do not undertand what impeachment means, nor do they understand how the process works.

Ferozek said:

As to Clinton, I support impeachment, because that is only way the truth will come out.

Reply:

The truth is already out. Everybody knows what happenned. You just iterated what happenned in your reply.

Ferozek said:

Also, please understand that the article(s) of impeachment of Clinton, by congress, does not mean a removal from office, but merely that there will a trial in the Senate.

Reply:

How can you treat this so leisurely. This is an important matter. All three branches of government come to a halt as a result of an article of impeachment sent to the Senate by the house. Can you imagine what will happen to the stock market. Asia is already a mess and US economy is already beginning to feel the crunch. The Supreme Court Justice presides over the trial in Senate. The President is unable to perform a lot of his regular duties. I think what the man did, does not make him deserving of an impeachment. A censure, perhaps, but not impeachment.

All these Republicans like Dan Burton and Henry Hyde have admitted to having affairs themselves and who knows what the circumstances were then. What about Gingrich. Why do you think he is staying away from this. I think it is because he might be bitter about the loss of his seat in the house, I mean the speakership and all but wouldn`t he be called back to preside over the vote if it is done now. Did he not have an affair too. How can these people sit in jugement of another man who clearly did not do anything against the constitution. What Clinton did, does not constitute high crime or treason.

Ferozek said:

If congress does vote on the article(s) of impeachment this next week, it only means that this thing will be in the hands of the Senate to decide either ways. The final senate vote (Demos have 45 seats and the GOP has 55 seats and the

moderate swing votes) will determine if he is removed from office or not.

Reply:

I think that the Rep. are in for a humiliating defeat. They need 67. They only have 55. They have to get 12 Dem. to vote with them. Considering that they can probably get a few of the more conservative southern Dem. senators to vote with them, they still will only be able to get to 60 or so votes. Perhaps, some Rep. may defect to the other side. Either way, Clinton will serve his term in office and these neo-nazis (Rep) will face nothing but defeat.

Ferozek said:

The reason that most Americans have not formed an opinion on this issue is, because they do not

undertand what impeachment means, nor do they understand how the process works.

Reply:

What do you think happenned on Nov 3rd 1998 when Rep. lost seats left and right. Gingrich was removed because of that. One of the reasons why Rep. lost so many seats was that they have shoved this muck in our faces for the past 6 years. They could not get him on filegate, whitewater, admin. appointments or even campaign contributions. They wanted to include that at the last minute because they realize that their case is weak but they had to admit that they could not find any dirt on Clinton.

Henry Hyde, I remember, commenting on Oliver North and his extremities in office said that it was a bunch of lies and was a witch hunt. Oliver North after recieving immunuty spilled all the beans about using the shredder in his office to waste away documents that were under subpeona.

How good a judge of truth do you make him to be now that he has more experience in this line of work.

Wondering what happened to my post?

Couldn`t agree with you more.

If the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal progresses to impeachment (which it sure threatens to do, as of now), then America will clearly have cut its nose to spite its face. Watching the Republicans and Starr et al gunning for Clinton is confirmatory evidence that all the negativism usually ascribed to desis can also be found in the white races. This is unbelievably petty, mean, low, and cheap. Not to mention intellectually revolting. The fact that the political opinion on this completely conforms to the Democrat-Republican faultline is enough to convince me that justice is on vacation.

Of course, pettiness is not a Republican monopoly, and the Democrats have also shown their fangs in the past. But, to be fair to the Democrats, the issues at hand in those situations had far greater import - matters of state like Watergate and Iran-Contra. Getting a consensual blow job from a subordinate and then lying about, no matter how morally reprehensible, is hardly a serious issue.

Memo to Henry Hyde: get a life.
Memo to Kenn Starr: get a blow job.

Please!

Saad

Re: Afrasiyab

I understand your arguments, but please try to understand that this thing will not stop in mid-process. The minute Starr handed in his report, whether you agreed or disagreed with it, the House Committee on Judicary was bound to invoke the process. The Committee just can not drop the matter and pretend that all is well. The best it can do and what it is trying to do, is pass the matter to Senate and wash its hands clean of this mess.

The senate does not want this hearing and is not interested in dealing with it either. The GOP, in the senate, realistically knows that the motion to remove the president, if it ever comes to a senate floor, will fail as things stand today. The fact that it will come to the senate and even though it will fail, will be in a real sense the act of censuring the president that everyone is talking about. The vote to impeach is nothing more than a prima facie case stating that there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. It is not the end of the world as you seem to suggest.

I agree with your statement that there is much disgust in the United States, amongst the average person, at the lenghts to which this has gone. I agree with you that it is time that this country moves beyond an act of sex and perjury to more important matters, but it will not. The only people interested in seeing this to a conclusion are the media and the people who matter within the Beltway. As a saying goes, ``Washington is a fantasy surrounded by reality``, the politicans, who take their cue from the hourly polls and media mood swings, are not doing this for the greater good of the republic. It is dirty politics pure and simple; there is blood in the water and the sharks can sense it and are getting ready for a feeding frenzy.

As to your contention that the Republicans were admonished of their partisan seal by the defeat at the polls, I disagree. The results of the election were a manifestion of peoples` disgust, true, but at the media for over hyping this issue at the cost of other events. If the people were so dissatisfied by the Republicans, as you imply, then why are the Republicans still in the majority ?

The best way this matter can be resolved is to let the process work its way to the end and to be finally settled, in the senate, either way. This country needs to put this issue behind and it will not be settled if we short circuit the process and pass an ad hoc judgement on the president`s mea culpa. The process has to be respected no matter how infuriating, maddening, sicking, callow, disgusting and insane it might be, because it is a democratic process. Winston Churchill once said the democracy is the worst form of government ever created by man, but as he added, it is still preferable to most forms of government.

L`etat c`est ne un` étrê d`homme !

Re: Ferozek

The Committee just can not drop the

matter and pretend that all is well.

Reply:

No, however, it can reject the matter by voting no. But it will not since the Rep. are so blind in their hatred of this one man that they cannot see beyond a couple of feet. All the people including Bob Livingston who ran against Gingrich accused him and the Rep. Congress of sleazy politics when it came to this matter. They offered this matter (their loss) as a resultant of the overactiveness of the Republicans in Congress against these frivolous charges against perhaps the most prosecuted administration in the history of the country.

I am hoping that it won`t clear the house also. They have about 15 or 20 Republicans in the house that may be refered to as the swing vote. If Clinton can get to them, maybe he stands a chance of surviving this in the house.

My main objection was that it will be a remarkable affair if this matter landed in the Senate. All three branches of Govt. will come to a grinding halt. The uncertainty will take its toll on the market. I will not be surprised if the market goes down the day this is passed into the house by the committee.

Re: Afrasiyab

I agree with your first and second paragraphs, but I disagree slightly with your reamrk about the downward trend in the stockmarket.

We both agree, please correct if I misjudged your opinion, that this issue is motivated by a partisan political calculation and that it will, by a slim vote, pass the House. In the Senate, as all indications suggest, it will be defeated.

The market knows this and if and when it does go to the Senate, there will be minor hiccup in the market and yes, it will lose a few points, but in the end, it will bounce back, because the final outcome of this process, barring any unforeseen events, is that Clinton will not be removed from office.

Besides, the market goes down each time Bill Gates has a bad hair day, which is everyday !

Re Ferozek:

But would you agree that once it gets to the senate it will bring all branches of govt. to a halt.

The market ``hiccup`` will continue for the duration of this trial in the senate, I assure you.

that can be for any number of days, however, I agree, that the unpredictablity involved in this matter can dictate other terms equally well.

Anyways, all in all, people like Bob Barr are a disgrace to this country, and they should look into the possibilty of redeaming themselves ( which I believe is almost impossible to do) by voting no on this.

Re: afrasiyab

Yes, I agree with you. The three branches of the government will be involved and the country might come to a standstill, but isn`t the same thing been happening since January ? What major piece of legislation has been passed since this story broke?

The House should start to debate the articles of impeachment later today and will need 218 votes to pass the motion this Thursday I believe. The Senate trial will begin, most likely at the end of January and may well last into early spring. Presently, there are 200 in favor; 20-15 undecided and 200 against it, all on party lines.

I agree with you on all points, but my basic argument is that, even though the senate trail will paralyze the nation, it would be of a far shorter duration and that the country, regretably, must suffer this to end this national nightmare as soon as possible. I see no other alternative.

I think that both of us agree on this one point: this must end, but we only differ in our approach to the problem. You wish to prevent a national dislocation by settling the issue and I want to do the same by letting the process work, even if it means additional months of gridlock. Am I correct ?