Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Clinton was impeached by a hostile Republican Congress. But was acquitted by the Senate. It was an extremely partisan affair. Had nothing to do with truth or anything else.
The truth was that Clinton perjured himself to avoid admitting a repugnant sexual liaison with an intern in the White House. That is not a high crime or misdemeanor. He deserved to be set down as a lawyer and fined for his infraction. He did nothing to justify the impeachment.
^^This. Men (and women) tend to lie about extramarital affairs.
I really don't understand your "logic"...
If it's a history lesson, it belongs to the history forum.
If current events or politics, Bill Clinton isn't candidate. I don't get the point.
So, someone's record who IS going to be a VERY important part of the administration does NOT concern you?
Clinton was on trial for his sexual harassment/assault of of Paula Jones. He lied under oath concerning his abuse of a young intern, to try to stem the testimony about a pattern of assaults. He wasn't impeached for an affair. He was impeached for lying under oath-aka perjury.
Repeating this for the younger crowd and those who believed the Democrat propaganda that this was all about consensual sex.
This was about a governor who told an officer to bring young Paula Jones up to his hotel room so he could assault her, then he and his wife went after all the women he was involved with over the years to shut them up. And they continued to lie about it.
If Linda Tripp hadn't told Monica she needed to keep the dress for evidence, many would have still believed his finger wagging lie to the American people.
So, someone's record who IS going to be a VERY important part of the administration does NOT concern you?
"I don't get the point"
Oh, I think you do.
No, I do not.
Trump's accusations of mistreating women is about himself in person, the presidential candidate. I don't care about his wife, ex, children, etc. That's all American elections BS.
But even that is not the main point. Trump lacks the qualifications to be president, even if he treated women differently.
Bill Clinton WAS already president for 2 terms. He was a better president than those who followed him, including Obama. Now his wife's running. Not him. Going back 15-20 years, saying because Bill had issues with women, Hillary shouldn't be president today is simply preposterous.
Well, for republicans these seem valid reasons, but not for anyone on planet earth.
Impeachment is a process in which an official is accused of unlawful activity, the outcome of which, depending on the country, may include the removal of that official from office as well as criminal or civil punishment.
We're talking about Impeachment in the United States. The only definition that matters is the definition specific to the United States. Your definition above is not the U.S. definition. Quote: "depending on the country".....your definition is not specifically applicable to any country.
Even if you want your definition to apply, your definition contradicts your own point. Your own definition-----Impeachment IS a process (not might be, not may, not probably, it IS) in which an official is ACCUSED (not convicted....ACCUSED) of unlawful activity, the outcome of which, depending on the country, MAY include (not does include, not includes, MAY include....as in might include, as in not required) the removal of that official from office as well as criminal or civil punishment.
Quote:
Right Wingers of course will claim he was "impeached".
It doesn't matter who says it, that William Jefferson Clinton was impeached is not a claim, it is a FACT.
Quote:
But that is simply politics.
No, it is a fact. No matter how much you wish it had never happened, it is still a fact. I voted for him twice while a registered Democrat, and it is a fact irrespective of my support.
Quote:
And it was a basically one sided vote.
True, but that fact doesn't make Bill Clinton any less impeached. He still was impeached.
We're talking about Impeachment in the United States. The only definition that matters is the definition specific to the United States. Your definition above is not the U.S. definition. Quote: "depending on the country".....your definition is not specifically applicable to any country.
Even if you want your definition to apply, your definition contradicts your own point. Your own definition-----Impeachment IS a process (not might be, not may, not probably, it IS) in which an official is ACCUSED (not convicted....ACCUSED) of unlawful activity, the outcome of which, depending on the country, MAY include (not does include, not includes, MAY include....as in might include, as in not required) the removal of that official from office as well as criminal or civil punishment.
It doesn't matter who says it, that William Jefferson Clinton was impeached is not a claim, it is a FACT.
No, it is a fact. No matter how much you wish it had never happened, it is still a fact. I voted for him twice while a registered Democrat, and it is a fact irrespective of my support.
True, but that fact doesn't make Bill Clinton any less impeached. He still was impeached.
Nope. YOu are simply wrong. The passing of an Article of impeachment starts the process. But one is not impeached until it convicted at the trial. So you may claim an attempt was made to impeach Clinton...but not that he was impeached.
The right likes to screw with the language. But the facts are he was not impeached.
You might also correctly observe that he was the subjecft of an Article of Impeachment...but he was not impeached.
And not why it is this way...because an Article of Impeachment may be simply a political act involving no fault or crime. The actual impeachment would mean you did something wrong and were subject to some penalty for it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We're talking about Impeachment in the United States. The only definition that matters is the definition specific to the United States. Your definition above is not the U.S. definition. Quote: "depending on the country".....your definition is not specifically applicable to any country.
