Home  ›  Clinton Was Impeached by the House of Representatives Quizlet

Clinton Was Impeached by the House of Representatives Quizlet

Written By domingo, 20 de fevereiro de 2022 Add Comment Edit

1998 Presidential impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton

Impeachment of Bill Clinton
Senate in session.jpg

Floor proceedings of the U.S. Senate during the trial of President Bill Clinton in 1999, Chief Justice William Rehnquist presiding
Accused Bill Clinton, President of the United states
Appointment December 19, 1998 (1998-12-xix) to February 12, 1999 (1999-02-12)
Outcome Acquitted by the U.S. Senate, remained in office
Charges Perjury (2), obstruction of justice, abuse of ability
Congressional votes
Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives
Accusation Perjury / grand jury
Votes in favor 228
Votes against 206
Result Canonical
Accusation Perjury / Jones case
Votes in favor 205
Votes against 229
Outcome Rejected
Accusation Obstruction of justice
Votes in favor 221
Votes against 212
Result Approved
Accusation Corruption of ability
Votes in favor 148
Votes against 284
Issue Rejected
Voting in the U.S. Senate
Allegation Article I – perjury / grand jury
Votes in favor 45 "guilty"
Votes against 55 "not guilty"
Upshot Acquitted (67 "guilty" votes necessary for a conviction)
Accusation Article II – obstacle of justice
Votes in favor 50 "guilty"
Votes against 50 "not guilty"
Consequence Acquitted (67 "guilty" votes necessary for a conviction)

The impeachment of Bill Clinton occurred when Bill Clinton, the 42nd president of the Usa, was impeached past the U.s.a. Business firm of Representatives of the 105th U.s. Congress on Dec 19, 1998 for "high crimes and misdemeanors". The House adopted ii manufactures of impeachment against Clinton, with the specific charges against Clinton being lying under adjuration and obstruction of justice. Two other articles had been considered, only were rejected by House vote.

Clinton's impeachment came after a formal House enquiry, which had been launched on October viii, 1998. The charges for which Clinton was impeached stemmed from a sexual harassment lawsuit filed confronting Clinton by Paula Jones and from Clinton'southward testimony denying that he had engaged in a sexual relationship with White Business firm intern Monica Lewinsky. The catalyst for the president'south impeachment was the Starr Report, a September 1998 written report prepared past Independent Counsel Ken Starr for the House Judiciary Committee.[1]

Clinton was the second American president to be impeached (the offset being Andrew Johnson, who was impeached in 1868).[a]

The canonical articles of impeachment would be submitted to the United States Senate on January vii, 1999. A trial in the Senate then began, with Main Justice William Rehnquist presiding. On February 12, Clinton was acquitted on both counts as neither received the necessary two-thirds majority vote of the senators present for confidence and removal from office—in this instance 67. On Article One, 45 senators voted to captive while 55 voted for acquittal. On Article Ii, 50 senators voted to captive while fifty voted for acquittal.[3] Clinton remained in office for the remainder of his 2nd term.[four]

Background [edit]

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas.[five] Clinton attempted to delay a trial until subsequently he left office, but in May 1997 the Supreme Court unanimously rejected Clinton'southward claim that the Constitution immunized him from civil lawsuits, and presently thereafter the pre-trial discovery procedure commenced.[half-dozen]

Separate from this, in January 1994, Attorney General Janet Reno appointed Robert B. Fiske as an Independent counsel to investigate the Whitewater controversy.[7] In Baronial of that twelvemonth, Ken Starr is appointed to replace Fiske in this role.[7]

In 1997, the first effort in Congress to start an impeachment confronting Clinton was launched by Republican Congressman Bob Barr.[8]

Jones's attorneys wanted to bear witness Clinton had engaged in a blueprint of behavior with women who supported her claims. In late 1997, Linda Tripp began secretly recording conversations with her friend Monica Lewinsky, a former intern and Department of Defense employee. In those recordings, Lewinsky divulged that she had a sexual human relationship with Clinton. Tripp shared this data with Jones'southward lawyers, who added Lewinsky to their witness list in December 1997. Co-ordinate to the Starr Study, a U.S. federal government written report written past appointed Independent Counsel Ken Starr on his investigation of President Clinton, after Lewinsky appeared on the witness list Clinton began taking steps to conceal their relationship. Some of the steps he took included suggesting to Lewinsky that she file a fake affidavit to misdirect the investigation, encouraging her to use encompass stories, concealing gifts he had given her, and attempting to help her find gainful employment to attempt to influence her testimony.[ citation needed ]

In a January 17, 1998 sworn degradation, Clinton denied having a "sexual human relationship", "sexual affair", or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky.[ix] His lawyer, Robert Southward. Bennett, stated with Clinton present that Lewinsky's affirmation showed there was no sexual activity in any manner, shape or class between Clinton and Lewinsky. The Starr Written report states that the following day, Clinton "coached" his secretarial assistant Betty Currie into repeating his denials should she be called to prove.

After rumors of the scandal reached the news, Clinton publicly said, "I did non take sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."[10] But months later, Clinton admitted his relationship with Lewinsky was "wrong" and "not appropriate". Lewinsky engaged in oral sexual activity with Clinton several times.[eleven] [12]

The guess in the Jones example afterwards ruled the Lewinsky matter immaterial, and threw out the case in Apr 1998 on the grounds that Jones had failed to prove whatever damages. After Jones appealed, Clinton agreed in November 1998 to settle the case for $850,000 while withal albeit no wrongdoing.[13]

The Starr Report was released to Congress on September 9, 1998 and to the public on September 11.[vii] [14] In the report, Starr argued that in that location were xi possible grounds for impeachment of Clinton, including perjury, obstacle of justice, witness tampering, and abuse of ability. The written report likewise detailed explicit and graphic details of the sexual human relationship between Clinton and Lewinsky.[7] [15]

Independent counsel investigation [edit]

The charges arose from an investigation by Ken Starr, an Independent Counsel.[16] With the approval of U.s.a. Attorney General Janet Reno, Starr conducted a wide-ranging investigation of declared abuses, including the Whitewater controversy, the firing of White House travel agents, and the alleged misuse of FBI files. On January 12, 1998, Linda Tripp, who had been working with Jones's lawyers, informed Starr that Lewinsky was preparing to commit perjury in the Jones case and had asked Tripp to practice the same. She likewise said Clinton's friend Vernon Jordan was profitable Lewinsky. Based on the connection to Jordan, who was nether scrutiny in the Whitewater probe, Starr obtained approval from Reno to expand his investigation into whether Lewinsky and others were breaking the police force.

A much-quoted statement from Clinton'south chiliad jury testimony showed him questioning the precise apply of the word "is". Contending his statement that "in that location's nothing going on betwixt us" had been truthful considering he had no ongoing human relationship with Lewinsky at the time he was questioned, Clinton said, "Information technology depends on what the significant of the give-and-take 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is non—that is ane thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely truthful argument."[17] Starr obtained farther bear witness of inappropriate behavior by seizing the reckoner hard drive and email records of Monica Lewinsky. Based on the president'due south alien testimony, Starr concluded that Clinton had committed perjury. Starr submitted his findings to Congress in a lengthy certificate, the Starr Report, which was released to the public via the Net a few days afterwards and included descriptions of encounters between Clinton and Lewinsky.[18] Starr was criticized by Democrats for spending $70 1000000 on the investigation.[19] Critics of Starr as well contend that his investigation was highly politicized because it regularly leaked tidbits of information to the press in violation of legal ethics, and because his report included lengthy descriptions which were humiliating and irrelevant to the legal instance.[20] [21]

House of Representatives impeachment research [edit]

On October eight, 1998, the United States Firm of Representatives voted to authorize a broad impeachment enquiry, thereby initiating the impeachment procedure.[22] The Republican controlled Firm of Representatives had decided this with a bipartisan vote of 258–176, with 31 Democrats joining Republicans.[23] Since Ken Starr had already completed an all-encompassing investigation, the Business firm Judiciary Committee conducted no investigations of its own into Clinton'southward declared wrongdoing and held no serious impeachment-related hearings before the 1998 midterm elections.[ citation needed ] Impeachment was ane of the major issues in those elections.[ citation needed ]

In the November 1998 House elections, the Democrats picked up five seats in the Firm, only the Republicans nonetheless maintained majority control. The results went against what House Speaker Newt Gingrich predicted, who, before the election, had been reassured by individual polling that Clinton's scandal would result in Republican gains of up to thirty House seats. Shortly after the elections, Gingrich, who had been one of the leading advocates for impeachment, appear he would resign from Congress as soon as he was able to find somebody to make full his vacant seat;[24] [25] Gingrich fulfilled this pledge, and officially resigned from Congress on January 3, 1999.[26]

Impeachment proceedings were held during the post-election, "lame duck" session of the outgoing 105th United states Congress. Dissimilar the case of the 1974 impeachment procedure against Richard Nixon, the commission hearings were perfunctory just the floor contend in the whole House was spirited on both sides. The Speaker-designate, Representative Bob Livingston, chosen by the Republican Party Conference to supercede Gingrich every bit House Speaker, announced the end of his candidacy for Speaker and his resignation from Congress from the flooring of the Business firm afterward his ain marital infidelity came to low-cal.[27] In the same speech, Livingston as well encouraged Clinton to resign. Clinton chose to remain in office and urged Livingston to reconsider his resignation.[28] Many other prominent Republican members of Congress (including Dan Burton,[27] Helen Chenoweth,[27] and Henry Hyde,[27] the primary House manager of Clinton's trial in the Senate) had infidelities exposed nigh this fourth dimension, all of whom voted for impeachment. Publisher Larry Flynt offered a reward for such data, and many supporters of Clinton accused Republicans of hypocrisy.[27]

Impeachment by House of Representatives [edit]

Dec 18, 1998: The House continued debate on four articles of impeachment against President Clinton for perjury, obstacle of justice and abuse of ability.

On December 11, 1998, the Firm Judiciary Committee agreed to ship three manufactures of impeachment to the total House for consideration. The vote on two articles, g jury perjury and obstruction of justice, was 21–17, both forth political party lines. On the 3rd, perjury in the Paula Jones case, the committee voted 20–18, with Republican Lindsey Graham joining with Democrats, in order to give President Clinton "the legal benefit of the doubt".[29] The adjacent day, Dec 12, the committee agreed to ship a fourth and final commodity, for abuse of power, to the full House by a 21–17 vote, again, along party lines.[30]

Although proceedings were delayed due to the bombing of Iraq, on the passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on Dec 19, 1998, on grounds of perjury to a thou jury (first article, 228–206)[31] and obstruction of justice (3rd article, 221–212).[32] The two other articles were rejected, the count of perjury in the Jones case (2d commodity, 205–229)[33] and abuse of power (quaternary article, 148–285).[34] Clinton thus became the second U.Southward. president to be impeached; the first, Andrew Johnson, was impeached in 1868.[35] [36] The only other previous U.S. president to be the subject of formal House impeachment proceedings was Richard Nixon in 1973–74. The Judiciary Committee agreed to a resolution containing three manufactures of impeachment in July 1974, simply Nixon resigned from office soon thereafter, before the House took up the resolution.[37]

H. Res. 611 – Impeaching President Bill Clinton
December xix, 1998
First article
(perjury / grand jury) 		Party Full votes[31]
Democratic Republican Independent
Yea check Y 00five 223 000 228
Nay 200 005 00one 206
Second commodity
(perjury / Jones instance) 		Party Total votes[33]
Democratic Republican Independent
Yea 005 200 000 205
Nay check Y 200 028 001 229
3rd article
(obstruction of justice) 		Party Total votes[32]
Democratic Republican Independent
Yea check Y 005 216 000 221
Nay 199 012 001 212
Fourth commodity
(abuse of ability) 		Party Total votes[34]
Democratic Republican Independent
Yea 001 147 000 148
Nay check Y 203 081 00one 285

5 Democrats (Virgil Goode, Ralph Hall, Paul McHale, Charles Stenholm and Cistron Taylor) voted in favor of 3 of the four articles of impeachment, only just Taylor voted for the abuse of power charge. V Republicans (Amo Houghton, Peter King, Connie Morella, Chris Shays and Mark Souder) voted confronting the showtime perjury charge. Eight more Republicans (Sherwood Boehlert, Michael Castle, Phil English, Nancy Johnson, Jay Kim, Jim Leach, John McHugh and Ralph Regula), but not Souder, voted against the obstruction charge. Twenty-eight Republicans voted against the 2nd perjury accuse, sending it to defeat, and lxxx-ane voted against the abuse of power accuse.

Articles referred to Senate [edit]

Article I, charging Clinton with perjury, declared in part that:

On August 17, 1998, William Jefferson Clinton swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nada but the truth earlier a federal grand jury of the United States. Contrary to that adjuration, William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, fake and misleading testimony to the grand jury apropos ane or more of the following:

  1. the nature and details of his human relationship with a subordinate regime employee;
  2. prior perjurious, false and misleading testimony he gave in a federal civil rights action brought against him;
  3. prior false and misleading statements he allowed his attorney to make to a federal gauge in that civil rights activity; and
  4. his corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of witnesses and to impede the discovery of show in that civil rights action.[38] [39]

Article 2, charging Clinton with obstruction of justice alleged in part that:

The means used to implement this course of carry or scheme included ane or more of the following acts:

  1. ...corruptly encouraged a witness in a Federal civil rights action brought against him to execute a sworn affidavit in that proceeding that he knew to be perjurious, false and misleading.
  2. ...corruptly encouraged a witness in a Federal civil rights action brought against him to give perjurious, faux and misleading testimony if and when chosen to prove personally in that proceeding.
  3. ...corruptly engaged in, encouraged, or supported a scheme to conceal show that had been subpoenaed in a Federal civil rights action brought against him.
  4. ...intensified and succeeded in an effort to secure job assistance to a witness in a Federal civil rights activeness brought against him in order to corruptly foreclose the truthful testimony of that witness in that proceeding at a fourth dimension when the truthful testimony of that witness would have been harmful to him.
  5. ...at his deposition in a Federal ceremonious rights activeness brought against him, William Jefferson Clinton corruptly allowed his attorney to brand false and misleading statements to a Federal judge characterizing an affidavit, in society to prevent questioning accounted relevant past the judge. Such false and misleading statements were later on acknowledged by his attorney in a communication to that judge.
  6. ...related a false and misleading business relationship of events relevant to a Federal civil rights action brought against him to a potential witness in that proceeding, in lodge to corruptly influence the testimony of that witness.
  7. ...fabricated false and misleading statements to potential witnesses in a Federal g jury proceeding in order to corruptly influence the testimony of those witnesses. The false and misleading statements fabricated by William Jefferson Clinton were repeated by the witnesses to the grand jury, causing the grand jury to receive imitation and misleading information.[38] [40]

Senate trial [edit]

Tickets dated January fourteen and 15, 1999, for President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial

Grooming [edit]

Betwixt December 20 and Jan v, Republican and Democratic Senate leaders negotiated well-nigh the awaiting trial.[41] There was some discussion most the possibility of censuring Clinton instead of holding a trial.[41] Disagreement arose as to whether to telephone call witnesses. This decision would ultimately not be made until later the opening arguments from the House impeachment managers and the White House defence force squad.[41] On January v, Majority Leader Trent Lott, a Republican, announced that the trial would start on Jan 7.[41]

Officers [edit]

Xiii House Republicans from the Judiciary Commission served every bit "managers", the equivalent of prosecutors: Henry Hyde (chairman), Jim Sensenbrenner, Bill McCollum, George Gekas, Charles Canady, Steve Buyer, Ed Bryant, Steve Chabot, Bob Barr, Asa Hutchinson, Chris Cannon, James E. Rogan and Lindsey Graham.[42]

Clinton was dedicated by Cheryl Mills. Clinton's counsel staff included Charles Ruff, David E. Kendall, Dale Bumpers, Bruce Lindsey, Nicole Seligman, Lanny A. Breuer and Gregory B. Craig.[43]

Procedure and schedule [edit]

The Senate trial began on January vii, 1999, with Chief Justice of the United states William Rehnquist presiding. The first day consisted of formal presentation of the charges against Clinton, and of Rehnquist swearing in all senators.[41]

A resolution on rules and procedure for the trial was adopted unanimously on the following day;[44] however, senators tabled the question of whether to telephone call witnesses in the trial. The trial remained in recess while briefs were filed past the Firm (January xi) and Clinton (January xiii).[45] [46]

The managers presented their case over 3 days, from Jan 14 to 16, with discussion of the facts and background of the instance; detailed cases for both articles of impeachment (including excerpts from videotaped grand jury testimony that Clinton had fabricated the previous Baronial); matters of interpretation and application of the laws governing perjury and obstruction of justice; and argument that the evidence and precedents justified removal of the President from part past virtue of "willful, premeditated, deliberate corruption of the nation's system of justice through perjury and obstruction of justice".[47] The defense force presentation took place Jan 19–21. Clinton's defence counsel argued that Clinton's grand jury testimony had too many inconsistencies to be a clear example of perjury, that the investigation and impeachment had been tainted by partisan political bias, that the President's approval rating of more than lxx percent indicated his ability to govern had non been impaired by the scandal, and that the managers had ultimately presented "an unsubstantiated, circumstantial case that does non meet the constitutional standard to remove the President from part".[47] January 22 and 23 were devoted to questions from members of the Senate to the House managers and Clinton's defense counsel. Nether the rules, all questions (over 150) were to be written down and given to Rehnquist to read to the party existence questioned.[41] [48] [49]

On January 25, Senator Robert Byrd moved for dismissals of both articles of impeachment. On the following 24-hour interval, Representative Bryant moved to telephone call witnesses to the trial, a question the Senate had scrupulously avoided to that bespeak. In both cases, the Senate voted to deliberate on the question in private session, rather than public, televised procedure. On January 27, the Senate voted on both motions in public session; the motion to dismiss failed on a nearly political party line vote of 56–44, while the movement to depose witnesses passed past the same margin. A twenty-four hour period after, the Senate voted down motions to move direct to a vote on the articles of impeachment and to suppress videotaped depositions of the witnesses from public release, Senator Russ Feingold once more voting with the Republicans.

Over 3 days, February i–3, House managers took videotaped closed-door depositions from Monica Lewinsky, Clinton'southward friend Vernon Jordan, and White Business firm aide Sidney Blumenthal.[fifty] On February 4, however, the Senate voted 70–30 that excerpting these videotapes would suffice as testimony, rather than calling live witnesses to announced at trial. The videos were played in the Senate on February half-dozen, featuring xxx excerpts of Lewinsky discussing her affirmation in the Paula Jones case, the hiding of pocket-size gifts Clinton had given her, and his involvement in procurement of a job for Lewinsky.

On February 8, closing arguments were presented with each side allotted a three-hour time slot. On the President's behalf, White House Counsel Charles Ruff declared:

At that place is only one question before you, albeit a difficult one, one that is a question of fact and law and ramble theory. Would it put at risk the liberties of the people to retain the President in office? Putting bated partisan animus, if you can honestly say that information technology would not, that those liberties are safe in his hands, and so you lot must vote to acquit.[47]

Chief Prosecutor Henry Hyde countered:

A failure to convict will make the argument that lying under adjuration, while unpleasant and to be avoided, is not all that serious... We have reduced lying nether oath to a breach of etiquette, but only if y'all are the President... And now allow u.s. all take our identify in history on the side of honour, and, oh, yes, permit correct exist done.[47]

Amortization [edit]

On February 9, subsequently voting confronting a public deliberation on the verdict, the Senate began airtight-door deliberations instead. On Feb 12, the Senate emerged from its airtight deliberations and voted on the manufactures of impeachment. A 2-thirds vote, 67 votes, would have been necessary to convict on either charge and remove the President from office. The perjury charge was defeated with 45 votes for conviction and 55 against, and the obstruction of justice accuse was defeated with 50 for conviction and l against.[3] [51] [52] Senator Arlen Specter voted "not proved"[b] for both charges,[53] which was considered past Chief Justice Rehnquist to found a vote of "not guilty". All 45 Democrats in the Senate voted "not guilty" on both charges, as did 5 Republicans; they were joined by five additional Republicans in voting "not guilty" on the perjury charge.[3] [51] [52]

Manufactures of Impeachment, U.Southward. Senate judgement
(67 "guilty" votes necessary for a confidence)
Article 1[54]
(perjury / 1000 jury) 		Party Full votes
Democratic Republican
Guilty 00 45 45
Not guilty check Y 45 10 55
Commodity Two[55]
(obstruction of justice) 		Party Full votes
Democratic Republican
Guilty 00 50 50
Not guilty check Y 45 05 50

Subsequent events [edit]

Contempt of court citation [edit]

In April 1999, about two months subsequently existence acquitted by the Senate, Clinton was cited by federal District Guess Susan Webber Wright for ceremonious contempt of courtroom for his "willful failure" to obey her orders to testify truthfully in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit. For this, Clinton was assessed a $90,000 fine and the thing was referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court to run into if disciplinary action would exist advisable.[56]

Regarding Clinton's Jan 17, 1998, deposition where he was placed nether adjuration, Webber Wright wrote:

Simply put, the president's deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been lonely with Ms. (Monica) Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false.[56]

On the mean solar day before leaving office on Jan 20, 2001, Clinton, in what amounted to a plea bargain, agreed to a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license and to pay a $25,000 fine equally function of an agreement with contained counsel Robert Ray to finish the investigation without the filing of whatsoever criminal charges for perjury or obstruction of justice.[57] [58] Clinton was automatically suspended from the United states Supreme Courtroom bar as a result of his law license break. Nevertheless, as is customary, he was allowed 40 days to appeal the otherwise automated disbarment. Clinton resigned from the Supreme Courtroom bar during the xl-twenty-four hour period appeals period.[59]

Ceremonious settlement with Paula Jones [edit]

Eventually, the courtroom dismissed the Paula Jones harassment lawsuit, before trial, on the grounds that Jones failed to demonstrate whatsoever amercement. Nevertheless, while the dismissal was on appeal, Clinton entered into an out-of-court settlement by like-minded to pay Jones $850,000.[sixty] [61]

Political ramifications [edit]

Opponents of Clinton's impeachment demonstrating outside the Capitol in December 1998

Polls conducted during 1998 and early 1999 showed that just about i-third of Americans supported Clinton'southward impeachment or conviction. However, ane year later, when it was clear that impeachment would non lead to the ousting of the President, half of Americans said in a CNN/Us Today/Gallup poll that they supported impeachment, 57% canonical of the Senate's decision to keep him in function, and two-thirds of those polled said the impeachment was harmful to the country.[62]

While Clinton's job approval rating rose during the Clinton–Lewinsky scandal and subsequent impeachment, his poll numbers with regard to questions of honesty, integrity and moral character declined.[63] Every bit a outcome, "moral graphic symbol" and "honesty" weighed heavily in the next presidential election. Co-ordinate to The Daily Princetonian, later on the 2000 presidential election, "post-election polls found that, in the wake of Clinton-era scandals, the unmarried most pregnant reason people voted for Bush was for his moral character."[64] [65] [66] Co-ordinate to an assay of the ballot by Stanford University:

A more political explanation is the conventionalities in Gore campaign circles that disapproval of President Clinton's personal behavior was a serious threat to the vice president'due south prospects. Going into the ballot the i negative element in the public's perception of the state of the nation was the belief that the land was morally on the incorrect rails, whatever the state of the economy or earth affairs. According to some insiders, annihilation done to raise the clan betwixt Gore and Clinton would have produced a net loss of support—the impact of Clinton's personal negatives would outweigh the positive bear on of his job performance on back up for Gore. Thus, hypothesis four suggests that a previously unexamined variable played a major role in 2000—the retiring president's personal approval.[67]

The Stanford analysis, nevertheless, presented different theories and mainly argued that Gore had lost because he decided to distance himself from Clinton during the entrada. The writers of information technology ended:[67]

We notice that Gore's oft-criticized personality was not a cause of his under-operation. Rather, the major crusade was his failure to receive a historically normal amount of credit for the functioning of the Clinton administration... [and] failure to go normal credit reflected Gore's peculiar campaign which in turn reflected fearfulness of association with Clinton'due south behavior.[67]

Co-ordinate to the America's Hereafter Foundation:

In the wake of the Clinton scandals, independents warmed to Bush's promise to 'restore honor and dignity to the White House'. According to Voter News Service, the personal quality that mattered near to voters was 'honesty'. Voters who chose 'honesty' preferred Bush over Gore by over a margin of v to one. Forty four percent of Americans said the Clinton scandals were important to their vote. Of these, Bush-league reeled in three out of every four.[68]

Political commentators have argued that Gore'southward refusal to take Clinton campaign with him was a bigger liability to Gore than Clinton's scandals.[67] [69] [70] [71] [72] The 2000 U.South. Congressional election also saw the Democrats gain more seats in Congress.[73] As a outcome of this gain, command of the Senate was split l–l between both parties,[74] and Democrats would proceeds control over the Senate after Republican Senator Jim Jeffords defected from his party in early on 2001 and agreed to caucus with the Democrats.[75]

Al Gore reportedly confronted Clinton after the election, and "tried to explain that keeping Clinton nether wraps [during the entrada] was a rational response to polls showing swing voters were still mad as hell over the Year of Monica". According to the AP, "during the one-on-one coming together at the White Firm, which lasted more than than an hour, Gore used uncommonly edgeless linguistic communication to tell Clinton that his sex scandal and depression personal approving ratings were a hurdle he could not surmount in his campaign... [with] the core of the dispute was Clinton's lies to Gore and the nation about his thing with White House intern Monica Lewinsky."[76] [77] [78] Clinton, even so, was unconvinced by Gore's argument and insisted to Gore that he would accept won the election if he had embraced the administration and its skillful economic record.[76] [77] [78]

Partial retraction from Starr [edit]

In January 2020, while testifying equally a defense lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump during his first Senate impeachment trial, Starr himself would retract some of the allegations he made to justify Clinton'due south impeachment.[79] Slate journalist Jeremy Stahl pointed out that equally he was urging the Senate not to remove Trump as president, Starr contradicted various arguments he used in 1998 to justify Clinton'southward impeachment.[79] In defending Trump, Starr likewise claimed he was wrong to have called for impeachment against Clinton for abuse of executive privilege and efforts to obstruct Congress, and stated that the House Judiciary Commission was correct in 1998 to have rejected one of the planks for impeachment he had advocated for.[79] He also invoked a 1999 Hofstra Police force Review article by Yale law professor Akhil Amar, who argued that the Clinton impeachment proved just how impeachment and removal causes "grave disruption" to a national election.[79]

Run across besides [edit]

  • Impeachment of Andrew Johnson
  • Impeachment process against Richard Nixon
  • Beginning impeachment of Donald Trump
  • Second impeachment of Donald Trump
  • List of federal political scandals in the United States
  • Listing of federal political sex scandals in the United States
  • Second-term curse
  • Sexual misconduct allegations against Bill Clinton

Notes [edit]

  1. ^ Prior to Bill Clinton, the only other U.S. president aside from Andrew Johnson to be the subject of formal Firm impeachment proceedings was Richard Nixon in 1973–74, but he resigned from the presidency on August 9, 1974, before the House voted on his impeachment.[2]
  2. ^ A verdict used in Scots law. Information technology was recorded as a "non guilty" vote.

References [edit]

  1. ^ Glass, Andrew (October 8, 2017). "Firm votes to impeach Clinton, Oct. 8, 1998". Politico. Archived from the original on September 28, 2020. Retrieved June 12, 2019.
  2. ^ "Firm begins impeachment of Nixon". history.com. A&E Television Networks. Feb 26, 2022 [Published November 24, 2009]. Retrieved June 12, 2019.
  3. ^ a b c Bakery, Peter (February 13, 1999). "The Senate Acquits President Clinton". The Washington Postal service. The Washington Post Co. Archived from the original on November 10, 2013. Retrieved December 4, 2013.
  4. ^ Riley, Russell L. (October 4, 2016). "Bill Clinton: Domestic Diplomacy". millercenter.org. Charlottesville, Virginia: The Miller Center, Academy of Virginia. Archived from the original on September 28, 2020. Retrieved October 3, 2019.
  5. ^ "Clinton v. Jones Timeline". The Washington Mail service. July four, 1997. Archived from the original on February xx, 2018. Retrieved December 15, 2019.
  6. ^ "The Starr Report Narrative Pt. VII". The Washington Postal service. May 1997. Archived from the original on November xix, 2019. Retrieved Dec 15, 2019.
  7. ^ a b c d "Clinton impeachment timeline". the Guardian. November xviii, 1998. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
  8. ^ Pace, David (November 6, 1997). "17 in House seek probe to impeach president". Newspapers.com. The Record. The Associated Press. Retrieved March iv, 2021.
  9. ^ Starr, Kenneth. "The Starr Study Pt. Xiv: The Degradation and Later". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on Dec 20, 2019. Retrieved Dec 18, 2019.
  10. ^ "What Clinton Said". The Washington Post. September 2, 1998. Archived from the original on Feb 5, 2012. Retrieved May five, 2010.
  11. ^ "The Stained Blue Dress that About Lost a Presidency". University of Missouri-Kansas School of Law. Archived from the original on July three, 2008. Retrieved July ten, 2008.
  12. ^ Ross, Brian (March 19, 1998). "Hillary at White House on 'Stained Blue Dress' Day—Schules Reviewed by ABC Bear witness Hillary May Have Been in the White Business firm When the Fateful Act Was Committed". ABC News. Archived from the original on June 19, 2008. Retrieved July 10, 2008.
  13. ^ Bakery, Peter (Nov 14, 1998). "Clinton Settles Paula Jones Lawsuit for $850,000". The Washington Mail. Archived from the original on September 29, 2011. Retrieved June iii, 2018.
  14. ^ "Starr's report at a glance - September 11, 1998". world wide web.cnn.com. CNN. AllPolitics. September 11, 1998. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
  15. ^ "Explosive Starr report outlines instance for impeachment - September 11, 1998". www.cnn.com. CNN. AllPolitics. September 11, 1998. Retrieved March one, 2021.
  16. ^ Erskine, Daniel H. (January ane, 2008). "The Trial of Queen Caroline and the Impeachment of President Clinton: Law Every bit a Weapon for Political Reform". Washington University Global Studies Law Review. 7 (1): ane–33. ISSN 1546-6981. Archived from the original on September 28, 2020. Retrieved December half-dozen, 2019.
  17. ^ "Starr Report: Narrative". Nature of President Clinton's Relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Washington, D.C.: U.South. Regime Press Office. May 19, 2004. Archived from the original on December 3, 2000. Retrieved May ix, 2009.
  18. ^ "Starr report puts Net into overdrive". CNN. September 12, 1998. Archived from the original on September 13, 2007. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  19. ^ "Report ends affiliate of Clinton era". Archived from the original on September 28, 2020. Retrieved January thirteen, 2020.
  20. ^ "News leaks prompt lawyer to seek sanctions against Starr's Office". Thefreelibrary.com. Archived from the original on December 28, 2011. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  21. ^ Palermo, Joseph A. (March 28, 2008). "The Starr Study: How To Impeach A President (Repeat)". Huffington Post. Archived from the original on February fourteen, 2008. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  22. ^ "President Clinton impeached". history.com. A&E Tv set Networks. January thirteen, 2022 [November 24, 2009]. Retrieved February 27, 2021.
  23. ^ "Firm approves impeachment inquiry". CNN. October 8, 1998. Archived from the original on September 28, 2020. Retrieved December 5, 2019.
  24. ^ Gibbs, Nancy; Duffy, Michael (Nov xvi, 1998). "Fall Of The House Of Newt". Time. Archived from the original on Baronial 21, 2010. Retrieved May five, 2010. (subscription required)
  25. ^ Tapper, Jake (March nine, 2007). "Gingrich Admits to Affair During Clinton Impeachment". ABC News. Archived from the original on February 28, 2012. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  26. ^ "Special election prepare to replace Gingrich". Ocala Star-Banner. January 5, 1999. Archived from the original on January xiv, 2021. Retrieved October 22, 2020 – via Google News annal.
  27. ^ a b c d east Kurtz, Howard, "Larry Flynt, Investigative Pornographer" Archived May eighteen, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The Washington Post, December nineteen, 1998. Page C01. Retrieved 21-June-2010.
  28. ^ Karl, Jonathan (Dec 19, 1998). "Livingston bows out of the speakership". All Politics. CNN. Associated Press. Archived from the original on March 13, 2007. Retrieved May ix, 2009.
  29. ^ "Judiciary approves 3 manufactures of impeachment". CNN. December 11, 1998. Retrieved December 13, 2019.
  30. ^ "Judiciary Committee wraps up instance against Clinton". CNN. December 12, 1998. Retrieved December 13, 2019.
  31. ^ a b Miller, Lorraine C. (December 19, 1998). "Concluding vote results for roll phone call 543". Function of the Clerk. Archived from the original on January 6, 2010. Retrieved April twenty, 2010.
  32. ^ a b Miller, Lorraine C. (December 19, 1998). "Terminal vote results for roll call 545". Office of the Clerk. Archived from the original on March 2, 2010. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  33. ^ a b Miller, Lorraine C. (December 19, 1998). "Final vote results for roll telephone call 544". Role of the Clerk. Archived from the original on March two, 2010. Retrieved April twenty, 2010.
  34. ^ a b Miller, Lorraine C. (Dec nineteen, 1998). "Final vote results for roll call 546". Part of the Clerk. Archived from the original on March two, 2010. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  35. ^ Silverstein, Jason (Nov 15, 2019). "Impeached presidents: What have presidents been impeached for? Here are the articles for Beak Clinton, Richard Nixon and Andrew Johnson". CBS News . Retrieved Dec 5, 2019.
  36. ^ Roos, David (Nov 1, 2019). "How Many US Presidents Have Faced Impeachment?". history.com. A&E Television Networks. Retrieved November 12, 2019.
  37. ^ Public Domain This commodity incorporates public domain textile from the Congressional Inquiry Service document: Stephen W. Stathis and David C. Huckabee. "Congressional Resolutions on Presidential Impeachment: A Historical Overview" (PDF) . Retrieved Dec 23, 2019. – via University of Due north Texas Libraries, Digital Library, UNT Libraries Authorities Documents Department.
  38. ^ a b Public Domain This article incorporates public domain material from the United States House of Representatives document: "A History of the Committee on the Judiciary 1813–2006, Department II–Jurisdictions History of the Judiciary Committee: Impeachment" (PDF) . Retrieved Dec 23, 2019. (H. Doc. 109-153)
  39. ^ Text of Article I Archived December sixteen, 2017, at the Wayback Auto Washington Post December 20, 1998
  40. ^ Text of Commodity IIII Archived Dec 16, 2017, at the Wayback Automobile Washington Mail service December xx, 1998
  41. ^ a b c d east f Wire, Sarah D. (January 16, 2020). "A expect back at how Clinton's impeachment trial unfolded". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved Feb 27, 2021.
  42. ^ "Prosecution Who's Who". Washington Postal service. January 14, 1999. Retrieved February 28, 2021.
  43. ^ Defense Who's Who Archived June 17, 2017, at the Wayback Auto, The Washington Postal service, Jan 19, 1999.
  44. ^ "Senate's Unanimous Agreement on How to Go on in Clinton Trial". The New York Times . Retrieved January 7, 2020.
  45. ^ "S.Res.16 - A resolution to provide for the issuance of a summons and for related procedures concerning the articles of impeachment against William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States". Library of Congress. January 8, 1999. Retrieved January 7, 2020.
  46. ^ "White Business firm Response to Trial Summons". The Washington Postal service. Archived from the original on August 17, 2000. Retrieved January vii, 2020.
  47. ^ a b c d "Impeachment: Bill Clinton". The History Identify. 2000. Archived from the original on May xiv, 2010. Retrieved May 20, 2010.
  48. ^ "Senate Trial Transcripts". Washington Mail. 1999. Retrieved February 27, 2021.
  49. ^ Swanson, Ian (Jan 28, 2020). "Senators ready for question time in impeachment trial". TheHill . Retrieved Feb 28, 2021.
  50. ^ Clines, Francis X. (February 3, 1999). "THE PRESIDENT'South TRIAL: THE OVERVIEW; Senators Meet Lewinsky Record And Vernon Jordan Testifies". The New York Times . Retrieved Feb 9, 2020.
  51. ^ a b "How the senators voted on impeachment". CNN. Feb 12, 1999. Retrieved June 8, 2019.
  52. ^ a b Riley, Russell L. (October 4, 2016). "Pecker Clinton: Domestic Affairs". Charlottesville, Virginia: Miller Eye of Public Diplomacy, Academy of Virginia. Archived from the original on September 28, 2020. Retrieved June 12, 2019.
  53. ^ Specter, Arlen (February 12, 1999). "Senator Specter'southward closed-door impeachment statement". CNN. Archived from the original on June 14, 2008. Retrieved March 13, 2008. My position in the affair is that the case has not been proved. I have gone back to Scottish law where there are three verdicts: guilty, not guilty, and not proved. I am not prepared to say on this record that President Clinton is not guilty. Simply I am certainly not prepared to say that he is guilty. In that location are precedents for a Senator voting present. I hope that I will be accorded the opportunity to vote non proved in this case.... Only on this tape, the proofs are non nowadays. Juries in criminal cases under the laws of Scotland have three possible verdicts: guilty, non guilty, non proved. Given the pick in this trial, I suspect that many Senators would choose 'not proved' instead of 'non guilty'.
    That is my verdict: not proved. The President has dodged perjury by calculated evasion and poor interrogation. Obstruction of justice fails by gaps in the proofs.
  54. ^ "U.South. Senate: U.S. Senate Ringlet Call Votes 106th Congress - 1st Session". www.senate.gov. U.s.a. Senate. Retrieved February 28, 2021.
  55. ^ "U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Coil Call Votes 106th Congress - 1st Session". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. Retrieved Feb 28, 2021.
  56. ^ a b Clinton establish in ceremonious contempt for Jones testimony—April 12, 1999 Archived April 8, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
  57. ^ "Mr. Clinton'due south Last Bargain". The New York Times. January twenty, 2001. Archived from the original on April 30, 2019. Retrieved May xv, 2019.
  58. ^ Neal v. Clinton , Civ. No. 2000-5677, Agreed Order of Discipline (Ark. Cir. Ct. Jan xix, 2001) ("Mr. Clinton admits and acknowledges... that his discovery responses interfered with the conduct of the Jones case by causing the court and counsel for the parties to expend unnecessary time, effort, and resources...").
  59. ^ U.S. Supreme Court Order Archived January 22, 2002, at the Wayback Automobile. FindLaw. November 13, 2001.
  60. ^ "Jones v. Clinton finally settled". CNN. November 13, 1998. Archived from the original on January 13, 2010. Retrieved Jan 16, 2009.
  61. ^ "Clinton–Jones Settlement Text". CNN. November xiii, 1998. Archived from the original on January 23, 2009. Retrieved Jan 13, 2009.
  62. ^ Keating The netherlands. "A year after Clinton impeachment, public approving grows of Firm conclusion" Archived March 3, 2008, at the Wayback Automobile. CNN. December 16, 1999.
  63. ^ Broder, David South.; Morin, Richard (August 23, 1998). "American Voters See Two Very Different Bill Clintons". The Washington Post. p. A1. Archived from the original on November 22, 2017. Retrieved Dec five, 2017.
  64. ^ Arotsky, Deborah (May 7, 2004). "Singer authors volume on the role of ideals in Bush presidency". The Daily Princetonian. Archived from the original on September 30, 2007.
  65. ^ Sachs, Stephen E. (Nov vii, 2000). "Of Candidates and Character". The Harvard Ruby. Archived from the original on Dec 31, 2006. Retrieved April 1, 2007.
  66. ^ Bishin, B. Thou.; Stevens, D.; Wilson, C. (Summertime 2006). "Character Counts?: Honesty and Fairness in Election 2000". Public Opinion Quarterly. 70 (ii): 235–48. doi:x.1093/poq/nfj016. S2CID 145608174. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 22, 2020.
  67. ^ a b c d Fiorina, M.; Abrams, South.; Pope, J. (March 2003). "The 2000 U.S. Presidential Ballot: Can Retrospective Voting Be Saved?" (PDF). British Periodical of Political Science. Cambridge University Press. 33 (2): 163–87. doi:10.1017/S0007123403000073. S2CID 154669354. Archived (PDF) from the original on April 7, 2008. Retrieved March 31, 2008.
  68. ^ Weiner, Todd J. (May 15, 2004). "Blueprint for Victory". America's Future Foundation. Archived from the original on April 2, 2015. Retrieved March 12, 2015.
  69. ^ "S/R 25: Gore's Defeat: Don't Blame Nader (Marable)". Greens.org. Archived from the original on May 10, 2011. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  70. ^ Weisberg, Jacob (Nov eight, 2000). "Why Gore (Probably) Lost". Slate.com. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  71. ^ "An anatomy of 2000 Us presidential election". Nigerdeltacongress.com. Archived from the original on May sixteen, 2011. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  72. ^ "Beyond the Recounts: Trends in the 2000 U.South. Presidential Election". Cairn.info. November 12, 2000. Archived from the original on May ten, 2011. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  73. ^ Ripley, Amanda (November xx, 2000). "Ballot 2000: Tom Daschle, Senate Minority Leader: Partisan from the Prairie". Fourth dimension. Archived from the original on November 22, 2010. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  74. ^ Schmitt, Eric (Nov 9, 2000). "THE 2000 Elections: The Senate; Democrats Proceeds Several Senate Seats, merely Republicans Retain Command". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 18, 2013. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  75. ^ "The Crist Switch: Pinnacle 10 Political Defections". Time. Apr 29, 2009. Archived from the original on May 3, 2010. Retrieved May v, 2010.
  76. ^ a b Carlson, Margaret (February 11, 2001). "When a Buddy Flick Goes Bad". Fourth dimension. Archived from the original on June 4, 2008. Retrieved March 31, 2008.
  77. ^ a b "Clinton and Gore accept it out". Associated Press. February 8, 2001. Archived from the original on April ii, 2015.
  78. ^ a b Harris, John F. (February 7, 2001). "Blame divides Gore, Clinton". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 2, 2015. Retrieved March xvi, 2015.
  79. ^ a b c d Stahl, Jeremy (Jan 27, 2020). "Ken Starr Argues There Are Also Many Impeachments These Days". Slate. Retrieved Oct 29, 2020.

External links [edit]

  • "The Articles Explained". The Washington Post. (December 18, 1998.) Archived August 16th, 2000 from the original link.
  • "The Starr Report", The Washington Postal service (September 16, 1998)
  • "Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, Report of the Committee on the Judiciary, Firm of Representatives, together with additional, minority, and dissenting views" (H. Rpt. 105-830) (440 pages), December 16, 1998
  • "Dale Bumpers: Closing Defense Arguments—Impeachment Trial of William J. Clinton"

churchillupocand.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

0 Response to "Clinton Was Impeached by the House of Representatives Quizlet"

Postar um comentário

Assinar: Postar comentários (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel