It was 22 years ago today that Clinton was impeached

[Stevicus]

On This Day: House impeaches President Bill Clinton

I recall my attitude at the time was "meh." I didn't really think that they had a very good reason for impeaching him, but I didn't really care that they were trying to do so anyway. It was good fodder for jokes, though.

Other events which happened this day:

In 1777, Gen. George Washington and the Continental Army began a winter encampment at Valley Forge, Pa.

In 1946 the First Indochina War began with Vietnamese troops under Ho Chi Minh clashing with the French at Hanoi.

In 1974, Nelson Rockefeller was sworn in as Vice President of the United States under President Gerald Ford.

I didn't like Clinton, but I liked Ford even less.

 

[Estro Felino]

No.
It was a private matter and they turned into a state matter.

 

[Quintessence]

No.
It was a private matter and they turned into a state matter.

I was a bit young when this was all going on, but that was my feeling about it too. It was the stupidest thing ever to impeach someone over, and I say that as someone who was a prude when I was a teenager as much as I am now. It was just dumb.

 

[SalixIncendium]

What happens in the Oval Office, stays in the Oval Office.

I mean, so what if he's married and getting fellatio from interns in the Oval Office. What does having morals have to do with being the leader of the free world?

 

[Estro Felino]

I was a bit young when this was all going on, but that was my feeling about it too. It was the stupidest thing ever to impeach someone over, and I say that as someone who was a prude when I was a teenager as much as I am now. It was just dumb.

Well...I was in middle school...I recall I was mystified by the news...when the teacher told us about that. She was giggling...
But even then I could not understand how the private sphere of a president was considered relevant.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I was a bit young when this was all going on...

Well...I was in middle school...

Thank you both for reminding me how old I am.

 

[Revoltingest]

No.
It was a private matter and they turned into a state matter.

His misbehavior was private, but he converted it to a public
matter by lying about it to a grand jury, & suborning perjury.
It's similar to Martha Stewart's stock dealings, which were also
private & legal. But she went to prison for lying to authorities.
(She wasn't convicted of the crime they pursued her for.)
The difference....she had no political protection from prosecution.

Note that I'm not saying Bill should've been convicted. That's
a matter different from impeachment. But it would be good if
politicians who commit illegal acts wee always prosecuted.
It would help keep'm in line. This just isn't done often enuf.

 

[Polymath257]

He was impeached for lying under oath. But, what he was asked is if he ever had sexual intercourse with Lewinsky. And he did not. Oral sex, under the definitions given to him was NOT intercourse.

I think there are legitimate questions of manipulation of an aide for sexual favors. And our sensitivity to such things has changed in the last 20 years. But from everything I have seen, Lewinsky was a willing participant and was not coerced.

In other words, NO, he should not have been impeached. This was a matter between him, his wife, and his intern.

 

[Estro Felino]

His misbehavior was private, but he converted it to a public
matter by lying about it to a grand jury, & suborning perjury.
It's similar to Martha Stewart's stock dealings, which were also
private & legal. But she went to prison for lying to authorities.
The difference....she had no political protection from prosecution.

Adultery is not a penally relevant situation...so, perjury becomes irrelevant, I think.

 

[Revoltingest]

Adultery is not a penally relevant situation...so, perjury becomes irrelevant, I think.

And don't forget suborning perjury.
That's very often ignored by Bill's apologists.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

But from everything I have seen, Lewinsky was a willing participant and was not coerced.

We can't completely say that as there was a big power differential at play here. It's like a student sleeping with their professor. Sure, they may be consenting adults but that does not mean the professor isn't taking advantage of their authority and that it isn't greatly unethical. IIRC, she recently said that, in hindsight, she was exploited and taken advantage of by Clinton.

Edit: Here: Monica Lewinsky is finally having her moment

So she obviously doesn't feel it was truly consensual.

 

[PureX]

His misbehavior was private, but he converted it to a public
matter by lying about it to a grand jury, & suborning perjury.

Yes, but they had no business investigating it to begin with. The incident had nothing to do with state business, or even a legal dispute. It was all just a big smear campaign pretending to be a real "investigation". Which most of the public understood, and is why the impeachment never had any real political consequence.

I am not a Clinton fan. He was a selfish scum bag politician from top to bottom. And so was Hillary. But so were the phony self-righteous republican pricks trying every dirty trick in the book to incriminate him.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, but they had no business investigating it to begin with. The incident had nothing to do with state business, or even a legal dispute. It was all just a big smear campaign pretending to be a real "investigation". Which most of the public understood, and is why the impeachment never had any real political consequence.

I am not a Clinton fan. He was a selfish scum bag politician from top to bottom. And so was Hillary. But so were the phony self-righteous republican pricks trying every dirty trick in the book to incriminate him.

Are you justifying lying to a grand jury, & suborning
perjury with the excuse of political smear campaign?

 

[PureX]

Are you justifying lying to a grand jury, & suborning
perjury with the excuse of political smear campaign?

He should have refused to answer on the grounds that the 'investigation' was bogus. Because it was.

 

[Revoltingest]

He should have refused to answer on the grounds that the 'investigation' was bogus. Because it was.

He chose to lie, & to attempt to convince someone else to lie.
Many people commit crimes, & are sent to prison for things they
could've avoided by better behavior. But the possibility of having
avoided crime is no defense against prosecution.

Martha Stewart could've avoided prison had she not lied.
So was it therefore wrong to prosecute her for this?

 

[SalixIncendium]

He was impeached for lying under oath. But, what he was asked is if he ever had sexual intercourse with Lewinsky. And he did not. Oral sex, under the definitions given to him was NOT intercourse.

I think there are legitimate questions of manipulation of an aide for sexual favors. And our sensitivity to such things has changed in the last 20 years. But from everything I have seen, Lewinsky was a willing participant and was not coerced.

In other words, NO, he should not have been impeached. This was a matter between him, his wife, and his intern.

He was asked if he had “sexual relations,” not “sexual intercourse.”

Is fellatio not sexual relations?

 

[Revoltingest]

He was asked if he had “sexual relations,” not “sexual intercourse.”

Is fellatio not sexual relations?

That depends upon the definition of "is".

Sorry....couldn't resist.

 

[ecco]

In other words, NO, he should not have been impeached. This was a matter between him, his wife, and his intern.

He should have been impeached for exhibiting extreme stupidity and letting down his supporters.

Right, wrong or otherwise, it effectively ended his ability to further his agenda.

 

[Polymath257]

He was asked if he had “sexual relations,” not “sexual intercourse.”

Is fellatio not sexual relations?

Not by the definition he was given. The definition he was given for the purposes of those proceedings was genital-genital contact.

 

[Polymath257]

We can't completely say that as there was a big power differential at play here. It's like a student sleeping with their professor. Sure, they may be consenting adults but that does not mean the professor isn't taking advantage of their authority and that it isn't greatly unethical. IIRC, she recently said that, in hindsight, she was exploited and taken advantage of by Clinton.

Edit: Here: Monica Lewinsky is finally having her moment

So she obviously doesn't feel it was truly consensual.

Which is why I pointed out that our sensitivities to such behavior has changed in the last 20 years.

There *is* a legitimate question whether he abused his office in that way. And, I would say that he did. But, under the laws of the time and the attitudes of the time, it was 'shady but not illegal' to do what he did.