And our impeachment system, while based loosly on the British system, is differant. I have read the transcripts, and at least to my satisfaction, I can not be certaion anyone compelled anyone to lie on the stand. A very interesting article, and a needed reminder that impeachable offenses are pretty much what Congress says they are at the time. I liked it. Let's not forget, the evidence may not all be in yet, Ken Starrr is still working, as I understand.
Abuse of power is quite a bit more serious than obstruction of justice.
I just doubt that either of the two counts approved by the House will stand in the Senate. Something as serious as impeachment has to be on the basis of a bipartisan consensus that the president has got to go. But the Democrats are willing to rally 'round him, and the American voters, to which I referred in my previous note, didn't seem to be pushing for impeachment when they went to the polls. The GOP pretty much banked its prospects as being the party of impeachment, and in return the voters handed them the first loss of Congressional seats in the middle of an opposing president's term since 1934. Heck, we knew that even before the first election.