What follows is the transcript of a live discussion among washingtonpost.com readers. The question on the table was, "What do you think of today's proceedings in the Senate?"

We can no longer accept submissions, but we hope you'll join us for future forums. Many thanks to all those who took the time to write.

Matt, Vienna, VA: The president can not pardon himself for any of the crimes for which he has been impeached. The constitution prohibits pardons in cases of impeachment. The constitution gives the sole power of impeachment to the House therefore the Senate can't decide if the accusations or impeachable or not, only if Clinton is guilty or not.

washingtonpost.com: This comment was a follow-up to a question posed in the chat with Robert Kaiser. The constitution says this about the president's power to pardon: "The president ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."

:

Wynelle: I haven't had time to watch TV during the entire proceedings, however - we have to give the Senate our confidence.

Personally, I think Pres. Clinton should resign and quietly leave Washington. I feel he has done enough damage to the morality of this country. It is time for a replacement to "conduct the country's business" and let us get back to a normal life style. President Clinton has caused this situation to drag on for over a year. Enough!

:

Peggy Orlando, Florida: I am not surprised that the House is not presenting anything new. This process is a sham. How sad it all has become.

:

Kevin, Cleveland, Ohio: Clinton should have resigned to spare the country of this trial, but a person who did what he did is not big enough to resign. He should be removed from office.

:

Lee, Williamstown, MA: The Senate should vote early to end this farce. We are witnessing the tyranny of a fanatical minority, and all of us will suffer long after the trial has ended.

:

Chip, Fairfax, VA: The bumper sticker reads, "Al Gore for President 1999" !!!

:

Ralph, Milford, De.: I think it is great, the people in Washington should be responsible people, they are the ones that take our tax money and spend it. I for one do not want a liar in control of my money. I feel that I am taxed to much and get real angry when I see what is going on.

Larry Flynt is doing a service to the country by exposing the scum in Washington. I am surprised that there are not more scum brought to the top of the pond.

:

Jerry, Montgomery, AL: This entire mess is a sham. Rep. Hyde has clearly proven that he is no less a smut dealer than Larry Flynt and is no less guilty of adultery than President Clinton. Of course, Hyde's was a 'youthful indescretion' -- when is he going to grow up?

:

Rob, Bethesda, MD: Two-thirds of the American public cannot be wrong. Everyone knows this process is a sham. The Republican House hates Clinton so much they would try to oust him for chewing gum on the Metro.

washingtonpost.com: This posting refers to public opinion polls showing that 65 percent of the public does not think Clinton should be removed from office. Does that figure surprise you? Or does it match what you hear from people around you?

:

Grace, Fredericksburg, VA: The people (Hyde, Barr, Lott, etc)sitting in judgement have committed far worst wrongs than President Clinton which makes the whole impeachment and trial an exercise in hypocrisy.

washingtonpost.com: What do you think of the efforts of Larry Flynt, who says he aims to expose as much hypocrisy as he can? (See this Post story for details.)

:

Jack, Washington, D.C.: The whole process is reminiscent of the President Johnson affair. Stupid and improper actions by the President provided hateful radicals an opportunity to revenge the Congressional elections, reverse the will of the people, and gain points with the radical religious right. The impeachment affair is an abuse of our constitutional system; the people at least have enough sense to recognize it for what it is and demand that Congress get back to work. With luck the Senate will provide the more reasonable and reasoned counter-weight to the wildly partisan House.

:

Ben, Placentia, CA: There has been a lot of discussion about President
Clinton's legacy. I think it to be rather simple. He will have been made a martyr by
right-wing Republicans who will be remembered as mean-spirited politicians with but one
agenda - get the president at all costs!

:

Bob, Bozeman, MT: I find it really offensive that anyone would praise Larry Flynt for invading the privacy of people who truly work for the good of the Nation. I used to work on the Hill, and while I have strong political beliefs, I believe that most Republicans and Democrats serve the Nation and their constituents with honor. The cynicism in the country, and the unwillingness to distinguish private behavior from public conduct, is really disturbing to me.

:

Bob Sunman, Indiana: Up until recently I had considered the Clinton mess much ado about very little. But for a man to pretend that his own impeachment trial is not a significant event seems strange to me.

I have just read an article from REASON Online (Nov 1994) that is chilling in its implications about the flaws of Clinton. This article by Edith Efron suggests that Clinton is severely dysfunctional as a thinker, unable to make decisions on his own and totally dependent on Hillary to function. Maybe we would be better off if the Senate would allow Al Gore to quietly take over.

:

R. Neil - Orange, CA: While I think that lying to family, friends, and country is enough to merit impeachment, this case goes farther. Clinton's apparent need to seek gratification, with little regard to consequences, could well point to a more complete lack of control.

If he can't resist sex, can he also not resist money, power, etc? Can we afford to trust him?

:

Jim, Sierra Vista, AZ: The president has had a sleazy personal life, but his accusers, the republicans, are far worse. The Republican party is now the party of adultery and hypocrisy. Witness: Hyde and Barr, two of the House managers that have been exposed and maybe more.

washingtonpost.com: Well, for those who agree that there's sleazy behavior on both sides, does this mean that voters should tolerate it in everyone, or in no one?

:

Bob, Bozeman, MT: Everyone who is against this process uses words like "sham, farce, etc." These terms are utterly meaningless. Explain exactly what is illegitimate about the case against the president.

:

Liz, Hyde Park, UT: As a lifelong Democrat and a woman, I think that the Republican Managers are doing a very good and credible job at delivering their side of the story. President Clinton is guilty of perjury and should be removed from office. He and his defenders somehow continue to manipulate the public into thinking that this is not necessary and that he really did nothing wrong. Wake up!

:

E.B., Blakeslee Pa.: The great moralist Larry Flynt exposing the scum in Washington!!

My God, what have we become, giving him credit for anything? Oh -- yes it is his very educational, editorial "Hustler".

:

william Miramar, FL: Clinton is not now, nor has he ever been, a threat to our form of government. On the other hand, Kenneth Starr's work has shown us precisely what it is about government that can be threatening to every citizen unless we rise as a majority to limit inappropriate investigations and the clever form of entrapment used by Starr.

:

Leslie, Arlington VA: The outcome of this impeachment trial will be perhaps the most profound State of the Union statement made since the inception of the Republic. Will the the rule of law be upheld by submission to the clearly defined and written standard or will political expediency rule and the law obeyed only when it is expedient or popular to do so? I sincerely pray that the members of the Senate take seriously their sworn word before man and God to safeguard the Constitutional form of government That spirit of upholding truth even at great personal sacrifice animated the founding fathers and at the conclusion of this trial it will be very clear whether it still lives or not.

:

Webb, Williamsburg, VA: This trial is only a small piece of the Clinton "legacy". This man has lied to the American people; he has given the country away to special interests, especially the Chinese Communists; and he has taken credit for the economic benefits set for us by the Reagan presidency.

I hope the Senate can be objective and read the facts. William Jefferson Clinton did commit perjury and he did obstruct justice. These are impeachable offenses (and by the way, sexual immorality is not in keeping with the American moral culture. 66% of whom did you poll?) May the jury have an open mind and do the right thing.

washingtonpost.com: Most reputable polling organizations conduct random telephone polls with sample sizes that are accepted by statisticians as good representations of the general population.

:

Jonell, Washington, D.C.: Ken Starr should be on trial. Why is he so obsessed with destroying a family? Doesn't he have crime in his neighborhood or know about people around the world dying for want of health care or doesn't he have children in public schools? He is the real smut broker in this.

The United States Senate, beginning with Democrats, should develop a spine and stand up and protect our country. A lie about a private sex matter should not be considered as ground for removing the president from office and, in the meanwhile, neglecting the real problems that face us.

:

K.R., Arlington, VA: Perjury is what it is all about. He's guilty and should be impeached for this. No one denies that Clinton is guilty. If he would have admitted to an affair in the beginning we would not be discussing this. There would have been no investigation.

:

washingtonpost.com: We have about one hour remaining in this discussion. Thanks to everyone who has commented so far.

Todd Knoxville, TN: The issue is not who has or has not committed adultery. Unfortunately, politicians in general do not appear to hold themselves to a very high moral standard. The primary issue is that Clinton blatantly lied (or "mis-remembered" depending on your viewpoint) to the American people and a grand jury. His recurring lapses in judgment do not give me much faith in his ability to run the country. The manner in which he has approached the entire process makes me question his integrity and wonder what he has managed to get away with in the past.

:

arlington, va: While I believe that Clinton has very poor judgement and should keep his pants zipped, I also feel that it's not impeachable. The far right has been looking to oust Clinton for 5 yrs. I believe there are more important matters that the Senate needs to debate!

washingtonpost.com: Speaking of getting on with other business, what do you think of the decision to go on with the opening of Clinton's defense on Tuesday, the same day he delivers the State of the Union to Congress?

:

K. R., Arlington, VA: Polls. I have heard enough of polls. It is time we stopped listening to the constant bleating of the media telling us what the polls are saying.

:

Agnes: I had been brought up with the idea of always voting for the best person for political office - not for the party - but for the man. After watching & hearing the Republicans conduct this very very partisan attack on our president - I will NEVER vote for another Republican.

:

Paul, Orlando: I fail to see how the democratic process of our government is a "sham". It is the duty of our elected officials to perform the tasks dictated by our constitution. Perjury is perjury, regardless of the nature of the act, and obstruction of justice is just that regardless of whether someone is covering up and affair or a murder. I am ashamed to be an american when the Commander-in Chief cannot control his personal affairs in accordance with accepted morality.

:

CAL, Vienna, VA: For the past year, nothing related to "Sexgate" has had anything to do with quality, stable government. Every day this continues, the legitimacy of the nation's political establishment sinks lower. Particularly the House Republicans seem to me like hysterical "pitbulls" pursuing a tremendously hurtful action irrespective of its institutional consequences. They will be the losers in the end.

:

Kay, Greensboro, NC: I attended a Boy Scout Eagle ceremony last weeekend. It is tradition that the President sends a letter of congratulations to the new Eagle Scout. When the point in the ceremony came to read the letter, nobody wanted to read it. In the end it was read, but not with pride. A motto of an Eagle Scout is "Character Does Count".

:

Paul, Eugene, Oregon: If the impeachment is truly not about sex and is about perjury and obstruction of justice, then we have a two "counts" that should be dealt with as legal matters. That is, rules of evidence and process should be as much a part of the Senate's decision to "convict" or "acquit" as are questions of the "threat to government" by Clinton's actions.

But the accusers seem to want it both ways: ignore such inconvenient legal formalities as specifying the precise statements that were perjurious, yet claim that this whole affair determines whether the "rule of law" applies to the President. It seems likely that it would be very difficult to convict Clinton in a regular court on the two charges (articles) as presented because of the specific legal elements of prejury and obstruction. (Perjury in the civil deposition would probably be easier to prove, but that's not one of the impeachment articles.)

So, my question is: Do those who favor removing Clinton from office believe the Senate should consider the same legal requirements as in a normal court before they vote "Guilty"?

:

John, Attica, Indiana: The wheels of justice grind slow and excedingly fine.
Every word should be weighed; witnesses should be called;the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God, should be told- by all. The President needs to be called and so do they women he has offended.

:

Sylvia, Springfield, Oregon: People around here aren't paying any attention to it. No one at work or home or in the neighborhood has mentioned it. We saw the prosecutor's lawyer on the new 60 Minutes and he seemed kind of righteous and indignant.

We are not illiterate, indifferent people. We are active, well-informed voters with strong opinions. This is a huge global ho-hum that needs to go away.

:

Paul, Kalamazoo, MI: So the president should be held accountable? Isn't paying $850,000, uncountable legal fees, and public embarrassment ENOUGH penalty for lying in a civil case that was thrown out of court? Let's end the inquisition.

:

Peg, Vienna, VA: Regarding the polls: How many times has the "public" been outraged at the result of some trial?

However, the jury listened to all the testimony and was in a much better position to make the judgement than those of us who get sound bites. Then when some of the jurors appear on a news magazine and explain their verdict, it makes sense. We must let the Senators do their job and not pay any attention to the polls.

Also, anyone who has sat on a jury knows that once there, you get VERY SERIOUS about it all and your opinion may turn around several times during the course of events/testimony.

:

Mara, Northwood, N.H.: The tone that I hear listening to the House managers is aggressive and vicious. That disturbs me. It seems that these men hate the president and that they will put any slant on any particular incident, even that which seems innocent to me. I can't understand what it is about Clinton that creates such hatred that despite the polls, his positive achievements and just plain common sense. These Republicans continue on and on. It is without a doubt an obsession with them at this point.

:

Loretta, Washington, DC: I believe that the country and the world will be served by allowing Clinton to serve out the term of office to which he was elected. He has worked diligently on both domestic and foreign issues and has been able to carry through on many important policies.

I am an attorney and I understand that when a person, even the President, commits an offense, he must face the consequences. I also understand that the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" is not defined in the constitution or adequately addressed in constitutional interpretations. Courts engage in a balancing of actions in many cases. What I have read in press reports leads me to conclude that there is room for a balance based on equitable considerations. The Senate will be faced with this sort of balancing of bad acts tempered by beneficial public service.

:

Mike, Boulder, Colorado: I have never heard of a prosecutor going after a witness for perjury in a civil lawsuit that has been dismissed as groundless. I have not since the McCarthy Era heard of such a wide dragnet being cast by the Congress into the personal and sexual life of public officials. I have never heard of a sexual harrassment case in which the gravest charge was that the victim failed to receive flowers on Secretaries Day.

I think most Americans are taking the only sane response to the impeachment by just ignoring it. It may seem irresponsible, but these guys aren't listening to us, so why should we listen to them? It's wonderful that the Congress is exposing so spectacularly how truly unrepresentative it is. In some sense it seems that the worst outcome would be for Clinton to resign, while the best might be for him to be actually removed. People might remember that next election.

:

Jerry, Avon. Mass: I cannot wait to get my fingers on the voting machine levers for the year 2000 elections. What I've seen is just how far out of touch with the voting public the Republicans are. Come 2000 I hope to issue a reminder of my displeasure with their antics here in 1998/99.. I believe I'll have considerable company in registering that message at the polls.

:

Joe, Old Hickory, TN: Point 1 - This whole affair is about LYING UNDER OATH, not sex.

Point 2 - None the President's supporters are saying that the charges are not true. They just keep quoting the polls.

Point 3 - The President could have avoided all of this if he admitted the affair from the beginning. It is he who is drawing this thing out.

Point 4 - Since the President has been impeached, the charges DO rise to the level of impeachment. Besides, perjury is a more serious crime than bribery according to the Department of Justice. Bribery is mentioned in the constitution as an impeachable offence.

Point 5 - The Democrats are more partisan than Republicans in their defending of a President who is a habitual liar. Again, no one disputes the charges.

:

Paul, Greensboro NC: Many people want the Congress and Senate "to do the people's business". Unfortunately, the impeachment trial is the country's business. Meanwhile, the President is trotting out a program a day. Has he ever been this active in the prior 6 years?

:

joan, Alexandria, Virginia: While touring our nation's Capitol yesterday, with my granddauther and three of her friends (ages 10 and 11) various comments were, "No I don't care to see Clinton's picture," "Who wants to see him anymore," etc. The children of American need a leader they can look up to -- not someone who has obviously abused his power.

:

Marilyn, Mayer, MN.: I'm grateful we live in a country of law and order, governed by a constitution that continues to serve us well. The House "prosecutors" are doing an excellent job in presenting the case against the president. The president broke the law--perjury and obstruction of justice--and everyone knows it. The question is whether the Democrats can live with their own consciences if they ignore the facts.

:

Eric, Pacific Grove, Calif.: This is a witch hunt, pure and simple and personifies the politics of sexual McCarthyism as the core of the Republican platform. The Republicans are almost entirely divorced from and not in touch with what Americans want from life and they are on a course to prove it. History will not be kind to the Republican rites of intimidation.

:

Scott, Wytheville VA: Air force pilot Kelly Flynn was removed from service for her inability to tell the truth. Not because of her inappropiate relationship, but because the country could not trust her to exercise good judgement. It's a sad day when people put party in front of country. Clinton should resign.

:

Paul, Eugene, OR: Marilyn says: "The president broke the law--perjury and obstruction of justice--and everyone knows it." As I asked previously, shouln't we have a trial that follows standard rules of evidence and process before making this type of legal claim as the basis for removing the President?

:

washingtonpost.com: We have time for just a few more comments before the end of this discussion...

Ed, Richmond, Virginia: I believe the Senate has should fulfill their Constitutional obligation and carry the trial through to the end. The Democrats are only standing by Slick Willie to protect their own political futures. A simple but vital moral principle is at stake here, and the President should be held to higher, not lower standards than the citizens whom he serves.

:

Gen, Mpls, MN: After hearing the evidence today, it is clear that the President should resign. It is much worse than I thought. He obstructed justice and lied under oath. Ordinary people can't get by with that.

:

Rosamond, Westerville, OH: No wonder the networks turned away from covering this garbage. It's a bunch of sorry old men giving the nation a lesson in hyprocrisy.
The Republican party owes us all an apology.

:

washingtonpost.com: This wraps up our discussion. Many thanks to all who participated. We hope you'll join us for future forums, and that you'll continue to follow our full coverage of the impeachment trial.