http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Henry Hyde (R-Ill.):
"This isn't a matter of setting the bar too high; it's a matter of securing the basic structure of our freedom...which is the rule of law.
"No man or woman, no matter how highly placed, no matter how effective a communicator, no matter how gifted a manipulator of opinion or winner of votes, can be above the law in a democracy. That is not a counsel of perfection. That is a rock-bottom, irreducible principle of our public life.
"We cannot have one law for the ruler and another law for the ruled. This was once broadly understood in our land. If that understanding is lost or if it becomes seriously eroded, the American democratic experiment and the freedom it guarantees is in jeopardy. That and not the fate of one man, or one political party, or one electoral cycle is what we're being asked to vote on today.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM - (R-FL):
http://www.cnn.com/... Some would have you believe today that, even if all of those allegations were proven to be true, that the answer is no. They are wrong. The issue before us, when we consider this matter, is not Monica Lewinsky. The issue is not sex. The issue is not whether the president committed adultery or betrayed his wife.
The issue is -- Did the president of the United States commit the felony crime of perjury by lying under oath in a deposition in a sexual harassment case? The issue is -- Did the president of the United States commit the felony crime of perjury by lying under oath to a grand jury? The issue is -- Did the president of the United States commit a felony crime of obstructing justice? Or the felony crime of witness tampering? And if he did, are these high crimes and misdemeanors that deserve impeachment? http://www.cnn.com/...
--------------------------
So what is the new bar that rethuglicans wish to use? The rule of law does not apply to Bush? What nonsense are we dealing with here?