I’ve been making some rough calculations here. Maybe the three of you have a different calculation than I do, but it seemed to me – we’ve just finished the 37 members of the committee – 21 Republicans, 16 Democrats – if my calculations are correct, all 21 of the Republicans asked friendly questions of Mr. Starr, all 16 of the Democrats asked hostile questions. Is that a surprise, and is that indicative of anything significant?

ELIZABETH DREW: It’s indicative of what’s happened to our politics, Jim. In the Nixon impeachment there were on that Judiciary Committee five members – two Democrats, three Republicans, who formed a swing group, who were genuinely undecided. The Democrats were conservative Southern Democrats. In the end in voting on the articles of impeachment six Republicans broke with the president and supported some of the articles. But our politics since then have become so polarized and as we were talking this morning, this committee has now become the receptacle of the extreme wings of both parties. They’re there by design to fight out the social issues and protect their parties on the social issues. So the whole idea that there would be –

JIM LEHRER: Because the Judiciary Committee traditionally handles those kinds of things.

ELIZABETH DREW: It does flag burning – abortion –

JIM LEHRER: Sure.

ELIZABETH DREW: Crime issues and so on. And people are appointed there to hold to their positions no matter what the public thinks. So it’s not terribly surprising that they’re not where the public is, the public should govern this decision. But it is – the impeachment is in the House of Representatives because public opinion is to be taken into account. I think Democrats and some observers have thought that there were two or three Republicans who might split with the rest of the party. Asa Hutchinson, Mary Bono, and Lindsey Graham. There was no sign of that tonight.

JIM LEHRER: No sign –

ELIZABETH DREW: In fact, Lindsey Graham committed himself to being – feeling that the President committed perjury before the grand jury. Mary Bono talked to Starr about what a wonderful man he is, and Asa Hutchinson was very interestingly trying to draw Starr out – shouldn’t we be calling John Huang because of the payment to Hubbell –

JIM LEHRER: Right.

ELIZABETH DREW: There’s no sign in there of – on either side of serious deliberation.

JIM LEHRER: Stuart.

STUART TAYLOR: Well, I agree with all that, but I also suggest that Alexander Hamilton – one of the founding fathers – sort of anticipated this 210 years ago and one of –

JIM LEHRER: Two hundred and ten years ago.

STUART TAYLOR: Right. And one of the issues of the Federalist Papers – number 65 – with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, I’ll read a little bit.

JIM LEHRER: You have exactly 45 seconds –

STUART TAYLOR: "The trial of impeachments," he says, "will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community and to divide it into parties, more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side, or on the other. And in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt." He goes on to say that’s why the framers put this in the Senate for trial, a body a little bit farther removed from public opinion but one thing he didn’t foresee, I think, was television and polls in which aside from all these other factors, the fact that the public does not want impeachment almost guarantees that it would take a brave Democrat, indeed, to break ranks.

JIM LEHRER: And Margaret, as we look ahead, when they come back, we’ve got David Kendall, who is known for his feistiness, is he not?

MARGARET WARNER: Absolutely. And he has been handling this case for whatever it’s been – not just this case but before that – this case for a couple of years and has been regarded inside the White House – as too legally feisty. So it’ll be interesting to see when he goes up against Mr. Starr.

JIM LEHRER: We’ll talk more about Kendall and Schippers when we come back, and we will be back at 8:25 Eastern Time for more of this evening’s session of the Starr testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. Until then, I’m Jim Lehrer. Thank you and have a good evening.

The post NewsHour Impeachment Coverage: Analysis and Commentary – Committee’s Questions appeared first on Stuart Taylor, Jr..