John Conyers

I urge my colleagues to vote for the Democratic motion to recommit the resolution to the Judiciary Committee with instructions.

I believe there is enough information to continue on with an inquiry into the impeachment of the President.

I believe these examples will dispel the myth that censure by the House is uncommon, unprecedented or unconstitutional.

I believe the investigation by the Independent Counsel which has led us to this point has been a tainted and politicized process designed to produce a political, not a legal or Constitutional result.

I urge my colleagues to oppose impeachment and allow us an opportunity to vote on a Resolution of Censure.

I urged the President to come before the American people, admit that he committed perjury and indicate that he was prepared to face the consequences.

I think everyone agrees that such indefensible behavior was reprehensible and immoral, and appropriately, President Clinton has apologized for misleading the country on this matter.

I believe that we have an independent responsibility, under the Constitution, to make a judgment concerning the conduct of the president, and whether he should be impeached or not.

I believed that any action the Congress chose to take to punish the President had to be bipartisan.

I believe and I think you should understand these four articles of impeachment we have before us today and to walk through the evidence of the crimes the President, I believe, committed.

I believe that our failure to conduct so much as a cursory examination before launching an impeachment proceeding is an abdication of our responsibility under Article II of the Constitution of the United States.

I suggest to my dear colleagues, that as we vote today in the people's house, and as this process moves forward, we must use all due deliberation to ensure fairness, and that any punishment meted out fit closely with the President's…

I believe the framers of the Constitution were more interested in limiting the number and kind of offenses which are considered impeachable than expanding the type of transgressions deemed serious enough to warrant the removal of a…

I asked him what greater evidence did he have to the president making a determination that he wished to influence the judicial process, as opposed not having his wife, his friends, his staff, the nation find out about his relationship…

S conduct under oath. It is about his subversion of the judicial system and his unwillingness to cooperate with the legislative investigation of that failure; it is about the rule of law. The President

The gentleman from Illinois to the Committee on the Judiciary with the instruction that the Committee immediately report to the House the resolution in the form of our Democratic alternative.

I believe that the Referral raises serious allegations that must be further investigated as to the facts and carefully considered in view of the constitutional standards for impeachment.

I think that the Judiciary Committee's careful, fair and expeditious review of all of the facts in light of the relevant law is precisely the Constitutional duty required of us by our oath of office.

The gentleman from New York has made the point of order that the amendment in the motion to recommit offered by the gentleman from Virginia is not germane to House Resolution 611 .

I believe that as a member of the House of Representatives, short of sending young men and women to risk their lives in battle, impeachment is the gravest vote I can make.

The gentleman from Wisconsin in rising to a point of order and also noting the dichotomy in this particular proposal of censure; that if this were to pass, we would go on record as stating that the President deserves censure, but the…

I believe perjury is evident and there is a strong possibility that perjurious statements may have been made in both the civil deposition and before the grand jury, it does not reach the threshold for impeachment envisioned by our…

I believe the president committed serious crimes, but if he would reconcile himself with the law so that we could end this thing on a note of honor, I may consider a different disposition than impeachment.

Well, two things I recall--one from President Clinton's grand jury testimony, which was not challenged, I don't believe, that issues related to her employment were taken up long before she became a witness in ths case

S perjurious testimony in the Jones versus Clinton case, does not amount to an impeachable offense since it occurred as part of a civil and not a criminal trial and since, ultimately, the case was thrown out of court. In fact, some even…