WASHINGTON -- The men who would take the lead in impeaching the president are a study in contrasts: an unassuming, aging attorney from Chicago with almost no political markings, paired with the consummate Washington ,X insider long affiliated with political dogfights.

About all that David P. Schippers and Abbe D. Lowell have in common is their voter registration cards, both marked "Democrat."

Different as they are, the two lawyers may soon be sharing the same grand stage, with unassuming Schippers serving as the Republican chief counsel and brash Lowell representing the Democrats. Their differing backgrounds speak volumes about the political fight that may be ahead.

In picking Schippers, Rep. Henry J. Hyde, the Illinois Republican who heads the House Judiciary Committee, went beyond the Washington Beltway to find a lawyer who could never be labeled a partisan attack dog.

Hyde's party has a solid majority on his committee, which would make the first decision about whether President Clinton should be charged with offenses that could result in his removal from office. But in the Senate, where a trial on those charges would be conducted, a guilty verdict would require a two-thirds vote. Any appearance of political motivation would only harden party lines.

In choosing Lowell, Democrats went for a fighter.

"When you're in the minority [party], you don't have the luxury of choice. You'd better pick someone who is good in the clinches, someone who can slug it out. Otherwise, you're fighting a losing battle," said Stan Brand, Lowell's law partner. "It was easy for Henry Hyde. He's got the votes."

Lowell's role is tricky because he works for members of the president's party. Some House Democrats may choose to be Clinton's defenders, others may not.

"Depending on how things go, it could certainly be a stretch of all my muscles," Lowell said.

Talk of impeachment is premature. But both political parties are preparing for a report from independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr on his four-year investigation of the president. They are positioning themselves in case Starr reports that he has found "substantial and credible information" that Clinton committed an offense that would fit the definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" -- the Constitution's standard for an impeachable offense.

What constitutes an impeachable offense will probably be a political judgment, however, and it will be up to Schippers and Lowell to help shape that judgment. In 1868, President Andrew Johnson came within one Senate vote of being thrown from office for "certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues."

President Nixon, in contrast, resigned before he could be impeached for enlisting federal law enforcement agents to help cover up a botched burglary of the Democratic National Committee offices. The House Judiciary Committee, however, voted not to bring charges against Nixon for evading a half-million dollars in taxes.

"It's a good political issue. But is it one that you impeach a president for?" asked then-Rep. Trent Lott of Mississippi, now the Senate majority leader.

Assessing Starr's report

As Lowell put it, he and Schippers will be the first legal eyes to assess Starr's report and determine whether it is worth further investigation, impeachment hearings or the trash heap. If the committee elects to open an impeachment inquiry, it will be Lowell and Schippers who will make the legal case for or against formal charges, run hearings from behind the scenes and, ultimately, counsel committee members how they should vote.

The political nature of any impeachment inquiry is showing itself in Washington in the behavior of House members and that of the parties' chosen counsels. A few Republicans -- and some Democrats -- have been outwardly hostile in the wake of $H Clinton's speech Monday night. But most have remained cautiously low-key.

"I have a very simple proposal," said House Speaker Newt Gingrich, "and that is to allow Judge Starr to finish his work and give his report to Congress, allow Chairman Henry Hyde to take that report to the Judiciary Committee and allow them do their jobs while we go on to work on the nation's business."

Schippers, 68, who once headed the Justice Department's organized crime and racketeering section in Chicago, has rarely commented on his pending role or on the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

"Politics is not a driving force or primary filter through which Dave Schippers has conducted his public life," said Vincent Connelly, another former federal prosecutor in Chicago.

The same could not be said for Lowell, 46, a Bronx-bred former human rights attorney who specializes in defending politicians and businessmen. Lowell has been a fixture on television talk shows, spelling out exactly what he thinks of Starr's investigation.

"This group of prosecutors used the grand jury the way cops of old used a billy club," Lowell once said of Starr's team on CNBC, suggesting Starr was more interested in "trying to get the president" than getting the facts.

Lowell is quick to say he has nothing against Starr personally. He noted that he has successfully defended Democrats and Republicans, including Republican Rep. Joseph M. McDade of Pennsylvania against bribery charges and the staff of New York Republican Sen. Alphonse M. D'Amato against charges of influence peddling.

Lowell may sound a little like Clinton defender James Carville, but Republicans on the Judiciary Committee do not seem offended.

"People can perform their roles in different ways at different times. I would hope if we are called on to consider a report by the independent counsel, members and staff would approach the task on a nonpartisan basis," said Republican Rep. Charles T. Canady, a conservative Floridian and outspoken committee member.

Fearless duo

In their own ways, Schippers and Lowell have proven themselves fearless. Schippers helped bring down Mafia figures such as Sam Giancana, telling Republican committee aides about one confrontation with a mobster who had promised he would teach the federal prosecutor a lesson if he ever found Schippers alone.

One day, Schippers cornered the man and challenged him: "I understand you wanted to catch me alone. Well, here I am. What are you going to do about it?"

As counsel to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Lowell has discovered ethnic massacre sites in Rwanda and toured war-torn Sarajevo in Bosnia.

He has had his share of confrontations as well. In 1991, during the court battle over Charles H. Keating Jr.'s failed Lincoln Savings and Loan, a 90-year-old Lincoln investor punched Lowell in the stomach, presumably for his role in defending a Keating colleague. That year, in another savings and loan case argued before the Supreme Court, he ruffled the feathers of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist by twice calling him "Justice Rehnquist."

"I am the chief justice," Rehnquist bristled.

Lowell lost that case, but he has won many -- 11 of the 12 criminal cases that have gone to juries, Brand said. He beat federal prosecutors in the first major savings and loan fraud case. He also beat an independent counsel, Donald C. Smaltz, when his client Henry Espy Jr., brother of former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy, was acquitted last year on six criminal conspiracy charges.

"He's a trial lawyer with an impressive record of courtroom victories for white-collar defendants. He's an expert cross-examiner, a very skilled questioner. He has a tremendous facility with evidence," Brand said. "I don't know any trial lawyer with as good a record as his."

Pub Date: 8/24/98