Clinton was elected president in 1992 and reelected in 1996. During his first term, an independent counsel was appointed to investigate Whitewater, an Arkansas land deal involving Clinton that had taken place about 20 years previously. The counsel’s investigation later expanded to include scandals surrounding the firing of White House staff in its travel office, the misuse of FBI files, and an illicit affair that the president had with a White House intern.

In 1998, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr issued a report to the House Judiciary Committee. It found 11 possible impeachable offenses, all related to the intern scandal. Based on the independent counsel’s investigation, the House Judiciary Committee voted four articles of impeachment.

The first article accused the president of committing perjury before a grand jury convened by the independent counsel.

The second charged him with providing “perjurious, false and misleading testimony” in a civil case related to the scandal.

The third accused him of obstructing justice to “delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence” of evidence related to the scandal.

The fourth charged that he misused and abused his office by deceiving the American public, misleading his cabinet and other employees so that they would mislead the public, asserting executive privilege to hinder the investigation, and refusing to respond to the committee and misleading the committee about the scandal.

During the Judiciary Committee’s hearings, experts testified on what constituted “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The experts called by the Democrats argued that none of the allegations against the president rose to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” These experts echoed the reasoning found in the 1974 staff report and Professor Charles Black’s book on impeachment.

The experts called by the Republicans disagreed. They pointed out that federal judges had been removed from office for perjury. They further argued that the president had taken an oath to uphold all the laws and he had violated his duties as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer.

  • LM

    The Democrats don’t need broken laws to impeach Trump (like Watergate break-in and aftermath coverups during investigations). They can come up with a list of “high crimes and misdemeanors”, the Constitutional grounds which the Constitution does not define. Hell, the Democrats can even come up with treason. All they need is a chance of having their majority in the Senate and anything goes.

  • The difference is that so far Trump has not broken any law that would qualify for impeachment. Clinton on the other hand lied under oath which did qualify him for impeachment but because of lockstep Dem unity, not removal from office.

    There is nothing unstable about Trump and his continued use of Twitter is welcomed by me as a conduit for the truth around the Lamestream corrupt propaganda arm of the Democrat party NBC CBS ABC CNN etc. I get most of my insights from there plus I get all of Trump’s Tweets the instant they are sent (not after being distorted by the LSM) which helps me discern what is really going on in his magnificent business brain and administration.

    Clinton, like Nixon, lied to the American people repeatedly. Trump may not be your typical smooth politician but if he has any fault it is just the opposite-he is too honest. Ex. Interview with rude lib sleaze bag Lester Holt where he confessed to firing Comey as his idea and having dinner with Comey where he was told he was not under investigation. Honesty which the #LSM crammed up his ass.

    The only way he will be removed from office is if the swamp feels threatened that he will actually change DC to their detriment and the K Street crowds. If that occurs his constituents across America will shut off federal funding the only way they can. They will quit paying their taxes and the destroyers will become victorious and our 200+ years will end. It will never happen.

  • LM

    It is a goal of the Democrats. Just a matter of time. Enough Republicans have to join Democrats for the articles of impeachment, a mere majority required in the House.

    If a future trial in the Senate looks like a guilty verdict (i.e. his Party is really abandoning him) he will resign. But if Senate looks like gridlock (2/3 vote of those present is required) we probably get to watch a trial as utterly ridiculous as Clinton’s (except that in his trial no member of his own party voted guilty!….pigs, all).

    He is not unstable but makes up his own rules of politicking. His opponents hated him plenty from the beginning but in office they are seething with uncontrolled maniacal hatred.