JIM LEHRER: Margaret, this committee — 21 Republicans, 16 Democrats — it’s got a reputation for being very politically polarized.

MARGARET WARNER: Yes. That’s an understatement, Jim. The issues this committee deals with, which are really hot button social issues, everything from affirmative action to abortion to criminal justice, has attracted the polarized extremes really of both parties. There are a few centrists, but – and Henry Hyde, the chairman, has a reputation for being very measured and very courteous, but he always has his hands full, and he may well have his hands full today.

ELIZABETH DREW: Could I make a point about that?

JIM LEHRER: Sure.

ELIZABETH DREW: It’s not just happenstance that you have the extreme wings of the party almost being — represented by almost all the members. But I was told a couple of weeks ago the leadership deliberately – of both parties – deliberately puts on this committee people who feel so strongly, are safe in their districts, that they will withstand public opinion. And I think that’s one of the things we’re going to see: people say, well, why would they be so tough on impeachment, if they are, when it may not be the votes in the House, when the public is saying something else – these people are trained to ignore public opinion.

STUART TAYLOR: Also, they’re not – they’re not elected by the country as a whole.

ELIZABETH DREW: Right.

STUART TAYLOR: So, for example, I spoke to one of the Republicans on the committee the other day who clearly seems to think the President should be impeached. In his district, he explained, he would be in trouble with the voters if he didn’t push this hard. So – and I think that’s probably true of most members of the committee. The kinds of voters they have electing them are also driving them here, and I think that that makes it perhaps a little bit unrepresentative of public opinion as a whole as we read – when we read a poll that says 62 percent of the people don’t want the President impeached – I don’t think that’s – I don’t think the members of this committee – at least the Republicans – are looking at those kinds of numbers in their districts.

JIM LEHRER: There is the room where all this is going to take place. It is yet to be gaveled to order by Chairman Hyde. Now, of course, the – it’ll be a while before we hear from these 37 members, or at least 35 members. The plan – and just to go over this – the plan this morning is for Chairman Hyde to make an opening statement and then for Congressman Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat, to make an opening statement, anywhere from five to ten minutes in both cases, and then Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel, to read a statement, which is already – there’s no secrets here, Stuart, about what he’s got to say – it’s already out and made public. It’s 58 pages, probably take him an hour and a half at least to read. And then there should be some questioning from the two counsel, the Republican majority counsel and the Democrat minority counsel, and then the other 35 members will question on one round, five minutes each, and then ten minutes from the President’s Counsel, David Kendall. That is the plan. Of course, it’s also supposed to start four minutes ago and it hasn’t started. But the guts of this today is what Kenneth Starr has to say, Stuart. In general, summarize what he said in his – what can we expect from him?

STUART TAYLOR: Well, there aren’t any great surprises, because his report is public. He makes the case that the President has not just perjured himself, not just lied about sex, as Starr put it, that there’s been a premeditated course of calculated perjuries and lies to the public, including, Starr alleges, abuse of his official powers over a period of a great many months, not a – he was surprised – little mistake type of thing. On the other hand, he – for the first time – clearly says that we did not find grounds for impeachment of the President or indictment of the President on the original Whitewater-Madison Guaranty front. In any case, they thought they were close, because they had two witnesses – not very credible – one of them now dead – who claimed the President had lied in the Whitewater trial about the $300,000 investment. He says that apparently is a dead end. He also says the so-called "Travelgate" and "Filegate" episodes, which he’s investigated, found no wrongdoing by the President. And so it really does seem to be coming down to what the White House would characterize as sex and what Starr would characterize as obstruction of the judicial process in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit.

JIM LEHRER: And, Elizabeth, he also makes the rather strong personal defense of himself and his conduct as independent counsel, because clearly that has been a subject of great controversy during these past months.

ELIZABETH DREW: Well, yes, he’s been under constant attack by the White House, by allies of the White House, and also has been criticized, frankly, by other prosecutors, who say that they would not have gone down this road, and even John Dean, remember John Dean —

JIM LEHRER: I do.

ELIZABETH DREW: Of the Watergate fame – has been saying –

JIM LEHRER: Let’s just explain for those who – John Dean was the White House Counsel for President Nixon, and he’s the one who came for a hearing like this – actually it was the Senate Watergate committee hearing — and read a statement that lasted – it seemed like for three days – but it wasn’t – it was two hundred and some pages long, and he laid out the entire cover-up, the whole thing.

ELIZABETH DREW: Well, he now, he has been saying on television that he thinks that Starr has exceeded his authority, that all the independent counsel statute says is that the independent counsel should report to the Congress if he finds specific and credible evidence that there may have been impeachable offenses, but not to present a brief or prosecutorial statement in his report and today, which he is going to do. But the committee members – one of the main reasons he’s there is (a) he’s the – the committee didn’t do its own investigation, so they’re relying very heavily on Starr’s report and what he says today, and Hyde’s people and some of the Republicans, knowing he has been so beat up, are using this specifically to try to restore his reputation because they fear that if they vote articles of impeachment, which they’re planning to do –

JIM LEHRER: The Republicans are.

ELIZABETH DREW: Right.

JIM LEHRER: Yes.

ELIZABETH DREW: And Starr still is – has such a bad reputation, that it would weaken their case, so he’s there to make the case and also for a little rehabilitation.

JIM LEHRER: Just for – all right. In case you’ve just turned us on here, there is Chairman Hyde, who’s just now come into the room. We should – we expect the proceedings to begin shortly. This – Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel, is not yet in the room. There may be some – we have been told – some preliminary discussions about some additional witnesses that some members of the committee wish to call. Now, Margaret, the – picking up on Elizabeth’s point there, some of the Democratic members have made no secret of the fact that they intend to question Starr about his tactics.

MARGARET WARNER: Absolutely. They are really – what they’ve made clear is that they’re probably more likely to question him about his tactics than necessarily come to either a defense of the President or try to poke holes in the case against the President. That’s quite different say from Mr. Kendall, the White House lawyer, who’s been told specifically by Henry Hyde he may not question Mr. Starr about his tactics. Whether that lasts, we don’t know, whether that prevails. But the committee members are pretty sure to really go after Ken Starr both for supposed early contacts with the Jones lawyers –

JIM LEHRER: There is – and speaking of Kenneth Starr, he has now entered the room, shaking hands with various folks. So apparently they’re going to proceed. The first order of business is, in fact, going to be Mr. Starr, rather than a discussion of other witnesses, as others suggested. So, Stuart, this thing is actually going to be moving on two tracks, possibly – the Republicans staying with Starr in terms of what is it you found, what are your allegations against the President, the Democrats staying on, okay, Mr. Starr, why did you do this and go through various – in terms of the techniques and tactics that he used in his investigation, correct?

STUART TAYLOR: Yes, sir. The Democrats have been highly critical of his tactics throughout on a whole number of fronts alleged leaks to the press and a federal judge is suspicious of Starr on that front – alleged mistreatment of Monica Lewinsky, when they initially interviewed her, pressured her to give evidence against the President, and many other things. This will be Starr’s first occasion to respond in a full way in a public forum to those attacks, and it will be – that will probably be one of the most interesting parts of this hearing. Will Starr make a convincing case that these complaints are groundless?

JIM LEHRER: And, Elizabeth, this is the first time – not only has he – he’s not made – the only time the American public has really seen him up till now have been in these kind of what do they call ambush interviews, as he’s coming out of his house carrying a cup of coffee in the morning, or getting out of cars, and he has been hurt badly in the opinion polls and all of that, so tone and demeanor may be as important in this case as his words.

ELIZABETH DREW: And you have to remember that his talent –

JIM LEHRER: We have to start. Here we go.

The post NewsHour Impeachment Coverage: Analysis & Commentary – Hearings Preview – November 19, 1998 appeared first on Stuart Taylor, Jr..