CLINTON DEFENDERS FIRE BACK; IMPEACHMENT ACT CALLED `VENGEANCE'.

Byline: Raja Mishra and Steven Thomma Knight Ridder Newspapers

President Clinton mounted a three-pronged defense against impeachment Tuesday that, though staged before the House Judiciary Committee, was aimed unequivocally at a few dozen lawmakers who weren't even in the room.

The White House sent nine scholars, prosecutors and former members of Congress to Capitol Hill to convince a swing group of 30 or so undecided moderate lawmakers that the evidence against the president does not support the charges, the charges even if true do not rise to the level of impeachment and that impeachment itself would paralyze the nation for months.

Apparently unconcerned about alienating committee Republicans, witnesses called impeachment an act of ``vindictiveness and vengeance'' and argued that its supporters would be judged as ``zealots and fanatics.''

Even so, Clinton lawyer Gregory Craig labeled Clinton's conduct in the Monica Lewinsky case ``blameworthy'' and ``wrong.'' He said the president's testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, in which he denied a sexual relationship with Lewinsky, was ``evasive, incomplete, misleading, even maddening.''

But, he stressed time and again, the president did not commit perjury.

The appeal to moderates got a boost Tuesday when news leaked out that one GOP fence-sitter, moderate Rep. Amo Houghton of New York, is expected to announce today that he will oppose impeachment. Houghton, a wealthy and respected veteran legislator, has a reputation as a bipartisan player. The development was celebrated by Democrats, who worry that House Republican leaders have scared moderates into supporting impeachment.

In an effort to further impress moderate Republicans, the White House added a surprise witness to its list, former Republican Gov. William Weld of Massachusetts. A former Justice Department official in the Reagan administration, Weld will testify against impeachment today, according to a White House adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Clinton nominated Weld to be ambassador to Mexico last year, but had to withdraw the bid in the face of heavy opposition from conservative Republicans like Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

More testimony today

The defense will conclude today with a lengthy closing argument by White House lawyer Charles Ruff, whose case is set out in a 184-page point-by-point refutation of all the charges against the president. The brief, made public late Tuesday, urges the Judiciary Committee to distinguish ``the sinful from the impeachable,'' claiming Clinton made moral mistakes but not legal ones.

The document attacks the perjury charges, claiming they amount to ``he said, she said'' disagreements between the president and Lewinsky or rely on mistaken assumptions about what Clinton was thinking when he made certain statements.

Perjury ``requires proof that President Clinton knew he was wrong and intentionally lied about it,'' argues the White House brief.

The document specifically takes issue with Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's referral to Congress - the basis for the impeachment investigation - asserting that it ``presents a distorted picture of the evidence'' and that Starr's conduct in the Lewinsky investigation betrays a bias against the president.

``It recommends that this committee vote to impeach the President of the United States on this demonstrably thin record,'' the brief says.

After Ruff is finished with his afternoon argument, the committee will begin its debate on articles of impeachment. A vote by the committee could come as early as Friday. At least one article will almost certainly be approved by the committee.

Key House vote

Clinton's fate will rest with a full House vote on the articles next week that, if passed, would trigger a historic trial of the president in the Senate, a spectacle the nation has seen only once before - the three-month trial of Andrew Johnson in 1868. He was acquitted.

The threat of such an undertaking, with its potential to incapacitate all three branches of government, was a central theme as White House witnesses and Democrats on the committee attempted to warn moderates of the consequences of passing articles of impeachment.

``I have this vision of Sen. (Orrin) Hatch questioning Ms. Lewinsky about the specifics of their relationship,'' said Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla. ``It will disrupt the nation's business for a year.''

But committee Republicans said the evidence against the president is strong enough to consider ousting him from office, and repeatedly cited the charges that he lied under oath in his deposition in the Jones case and before the Lewinsky grand jury.

``It seems to me that the president unequivocally denied recollecting being alone with Monica Lewinsky. . . . I don't see how anyone can believe that,'' said Rep. Charles Canady, R-Fla.

Censure vote unlikely

Incoming Speaker of the House Bob Livingston of Louisiana has said he will not allow the House to vote on censure, a milder form of punishment that would verbally reprimand the president. This would leave moderates with a stark choice between impeachment and doing nothing. In addition, Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, the powerful GOP leader whose job it is to make sure Republicans vote with the party, has emerged as a visible proponent of impeachment.

Democrats are hoping that, at some point in the next seven days, a deal to put censure back on the table can be brokered.

``I think discussions between Bob Livingston and the White House through some intermediary would be appropriate,'' said Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., a committee member who has a censure resolution waiting in the wings.

CAPTION(S):

Photo

Photo: (color) Clinton