In the USA what is the balance to impeachment?

[j666]

@NeonMadman

It shocks nobody today to think of Clinton getting oral sex from an intern in the Oval Office (though one can imagine the outrage of the media and the left if GW Bush had been caught doing that), but back then, such conduct on the part of a president was unthinkable.

I would disagree; I think it shocks just as many people today as then, and it was not unthinkable then for a lot of people, it was just silly and embarrassing.

@md2000

Let’s clarify again. Clinton was accused of perjury, a fairly serious crime. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”

Wait - he said that in a press conference, not in court; while most of us might agree that was a lie, I don’t think anyone in the country has ever been surprised when a politician lies to the press.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

@j666

Wait - he said that in a press conference, not in court; while most of us might agree that was a lie, I don’t think anyone in the country has ever been surprised when a politician lies to the press.

He said that in a press conference but he also said that separately in a deposition, which is where the legal charges incurred.

During the deposition, Clinton was asked “Have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1?” The judge ordered that Clinton be given an opportunity to review the agreed definition. Afterwards, based on the definition created by the Independent Counsel’s Office, Clinton answered, “I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.”

[NeonMadman]

@Derleth

Lamas are Himalayan. Llamas are Andean. Lllamas are Welllsh.

Lama, Llama, Lllama, Duck?

[NeonMadman]

@j666

I would disagree; I think it shocks just as many people today as then, and it was not unthinkable then for a lot of people, it was just silly and embarrassing.

Just to clarify, I wasn’t saying that oral sex is unthinkable or that it was shocking that someone (even a president) might engage in it. It was the specific scenario of a president engaging in that conduct with an intern in the Oval Office that was shocking and unthinkable at the time. Ronald Reagan is said to have once refused to remove his suit jacket on a hot day because of his respect for the office (and I acknowledge that may be an apocryphal story); nonetheless, Clinton engaging in the behavior that he did only two administrations later was jarring, to say the least. I think that it was more shocking then than now, simply because it has become a familiar part of our history over the last two decades.

[Colibri]

@NeonMadman

I don’t think you can really categorize Clinton’s impeachment as an attempted coup.

Moderator Note

As I instructed in post #75, if you want to discuss whether the Clinton impeachment was an attempted coup please take it to another forum. No warning issued, but let’s discontinue this hijack.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

[NeonMadman]

@Colibri

Moderator Note

As I instructed in post #75, if you want to discuss whether the Clinton impeachment was an attempted coup please take it to another forum. No warning issued, but let’s discontinue this hijack.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

Sorry. I responded to a message on the first page of the thread without realizing until later that there were further pages. I only noticed your instruction after the fact.

[md2000]

As I understood, the definition Exhibit 1 defined sexual relations as touching genitalia, buttocks, breasts, intercourse. Since all he did was sit back and let Monica touch him, he never touched her naughty bits, so in his mind (and very technically) he was correct, he did not have sexual relations. All that touched him was her hands and mouth. Oh, and what touched her was a cigar tube…

So one presumes it’s the fault of Ken Starr (and his wife) that he lacked the imagination to “cover all the bases” so to speak.

But ultimately IIRC some Republicans voted against convicting him in the impeachment’s trial so I suspect they felt the standard for removing a sitting president had not been met - so not just high crimes but heinous crimes was the standard in their minds. A misleading but possibly/arguably truthful sworn statement was not sufficient.

[j666]

@Exapno_Mapcase

He said that in a press conference but he also said that separately in a deposition, which is where the legal charges incurred.

That’s a different quote. I appreciate they are similar, but the first one is very famous and was not perjury.

[j666]

@NeonMadman

Just to clarify, I wasn’t saying that oral sex is unthinkable or that it was shocking that someone (even a president) might engage in it. It was the specific scenario of a president engaging in that conduct with an intern in the Oval Office that was shocking and unthinkable at the time. Ronald Reagan is said to have once refused to remove his suit jacket on a hot day because of his respect for the office (and I acknowledge that may be an apocryphal story); nonetheless, Clinton engaging in the behavior that he did only two administrations later was jarring, to say the least. I think that it was more shocking then than now, simply because it has become a familiar part of our history over the last two decades.

I understood you; I disagreed with you.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Telemark

Any Bostonian will tell you, a three-l lama is a wicked big fiah.

Just figured this one out. Bravo.