Go Slow, Avoid Missteps, Lott Warns

WASHINGTON —  Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) on Monday urged Democrats to “calm down” and not rush into a deal to censure President Clinton, saying that the Senate must hear a full presentation of the evidence on Clinton’s impeachment before deciding his fate.

“We need to go forward and do our constitutional duty to hear the evidence,” Lott said in an interview.

He also warned that a censure resolution that commands bipartisan support could be trickier to negotiate and craft than some assume. Unless carefully and narrowly written, such a rebuke could raise “all kinds of constitutional problems,” Lott said.

“I don’t think a magic formula has been found yet” to put an end to the impeachment controversy, the GOP lawmaker added.

And laying down a partisan gauntlet, he disparaged Senate Democrats, most of whom are said to oppose convicting Clinton--and thus removing him from office--on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice for his handling of disclosures about an adulterous affair with a White House intern.

“Are there no Democrats that are offended if, in fact, the evidence proves perjury or obstruction of justice? Surely there are some Democrats that will be concerned about that,” Lott said.

Lott’s go-slow remarks should reassure hard-line conservatives, who fear that a handful of GOP moderates might join the Senate’s 45 Democrats in forging what amounts to a plea bargain for Clinton without the benefit of a full trial--and votes on the two articles of impeachment passed by the House.

In the wake of the Dec. 19 House vote, largely along party lines, pressure has built for censuring the president as a way to abort a full-blown Senate trial.

But in an afternoon telephone interview from his Pascagoula, Miss., office, Lott insisted that such a proceeding--scheduled to begin late next week--must go forward.

At the very least, he said, Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) should present the case against the president to the full Senate. As chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Hyde also will serve as the chief prosecutor, or “manager,” during the trial.

Only after Hyde’s presentation and a response from the White House, Lott said, could there be votes on the two articles of impeachment or some other form of punishment, such as censure.

“The media is missing the facts when they assume that senators have made up their minds,” he said. “Most are going to wait to see what evidence is going to be presented.”

Hyde previously has said that he does not intend to call any witnesses, and instead would rely on the evidence developed by independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr, which formed the basis of the articles of impeachment.

But that could change. Hyde and 12 other managers--Republican members of his committee who will assist at the Senate trial--are to meet today behind closed doors to further map out strategy and assign areas of responsibilities.

“I think that you will see different options discussed for the presentation of evidence,” a House Judiciary Committee aide said. “We have a case to present, and we’ll be ready to present that case in a variety of ways.”

Sources said some of the managers favor calling witnesses, while others believe it is best to simply rely on Starr’s referral.

In any case, how quickly the trial proceeds after Hyde’s presentation, Lott said, would depend “to a large degree on the White House.”

If the president’s attorneys do not dispute the facts of the case, the trial’s evidentiary phase should take no more than three days, Lott said. “I don’t see why that would be protracted.”

But if White House lawyers call witnesses and in other ways mount a full defense, the trial could drag on for weeks, he said.

After presentations from both sides, “there could be a number of votes on the articles [of impeachment], or on other things after the votes on the articles have occurred,” Lott added.

“We hope we can go forward in an expeditious manner, but one that’s fair to all concerned,” he said.

From his Gulf Coast office, the majority leader has been working the telephones, consulting with his GOP colleagues, as well as with his Democratic counterpart, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.

Lott said he also is conferring with House and White House officials, but characterized those talks as “judicious” and limited largely to scheduling matters.

After senators return to town next week, “we’ll have a number of meetings to see where everybody is,” Lott said.

Also on Monday, anti-Clinton activists opened a new front in their campaign to pressure Democrats to vote to remove Clinton from office, which would require a two-thirds vote in the 100-member Senate.

In a front-page editorial in its new editions, Human Events, a conservative magazine, identified 27 incumbent Democrats who voted in 1989 to remove a federal judge, Walter Nixon, from office for having made a “false or misleading statement to a grand jury.”

Lott said in the interview that he hoped outside groups would refrain from lobbying senators during the trial, but that he is not optimistic.

“I would hope none of that would occur, although this is still a country where you’re free to advertise,” Lott said. “I don’t think most senators are going to be unduly affected.”

As for a censure resolution, he said, it must be narrowly focused. If, for instance, lawmakers seek to impose a fine on Clinton, in addition to rebuking him, “you get into all kinds of problems,” Lott said. “We need to be very careful how we proceed.”

Times staff writer Richard A. Serrano contributed to this story.

The Times’ Web site puts you in touch with your lawmakers through the Internet. To let them know how you feel about the impeachment process, go to: https://www.latimes.com/scandal