Can someone answer this why was Clinton in impeached while Bush is still in office?

Question

I mean Clinton was impeached because of an affair he was a good president I mean so what he has his private life John Kennedy had sex with Marylyn Monroe. Yet Bush covered more things and has the illitericey of a fith grader (how hard is it to say nuclear?HONESTLY) Yet he still remains in office? Come on is America really that scared about image because I'd choose someone who had an affair over someone who can barely say his own name.

Answer 1

how many times do we have to say it? Clinton lied to congress impeached for that not affair. and as soon as you give me one provable alligation for bush to be impeached then you can make a point. hating someone tends to be unacceptable to the house for impeachement but im sure you will try to pass that too.

lol. you people are funny. hunter look up the definition of impeach there smart guy.

Answer 2

Intelligent question, ruined by slander of the President.

Give it time. Impeachment means nothing if there is no conviction. That requires proof that is clear beyond Party lines. The new officeholders have had no chance to see that evidence.

By the way, Clinton lied under oath, which is perjury. This is the charge he faced during his impeachment, not adultery. The unanimous NO vote by Democrats saved him from conviction. I agree he was a good President because he worked in a bi-partisan manner

Answer 3

Clinton was impeached for perjury, not for being a sleazy cheating rapist who told Juanita Broderick to put some ice on her face where Clinton hurt her while he was raping her.
Bush is in office because he got more votes than any man in history in an American Presidential election.
Kennedy said nuclear the same way Bush does. Maybe Bush learned it from him.
How illiterate are 5th graders in the school you hope to attend when you get old enough? Or did you mean literacy, not illiteracy like you said in your question? Have you found the spell check on your computer? Maybe you should ask your English teacher to look at your question and correct your grammar.

Answer 4

The Republicans were playing to their conservative Christian base by showing how "bad" and "evil" the Democrats are, thus insuring that they could have run Garfield the Cat in the following election and win. Compared to what they ran, Garfield is much more intelligent, but that's beside the point.

The Democrats, on the other hand, although they have many points they could impeach Bush on ranging from lying to the American people AND Congress about Iraq to his imperialistic tendencies to sell out the country for oil which we will never see, refuse to go the impeachment route. Why? Because they want the American people to see that they are better than the Republicans, refusing to lower themselves to that level. This should also increase the standing of the Democratic Party world-wide when a Democrat is elected President in 2008. (Hint: It WON'T be Vilsack of Iowa!)

But remember, there are still a little over two years left in Bush's reign and he could screw up big-time, even worse than he has already. Then, all nice-guy bets would be off and you better believe the Democrats would go after him with a vengeance. Give him time, he'll hang himself yet.

Answer 5

Well to start with CLINTON WAS NEVER IMPEACHED. There was talk of impeachment proceedings but it never went further than that. Someone else can fill in the exact timeline...He remained in office and then retired to a private law practice in Harlem.

To touch on Kennedy for a moment. The reason that Marilyn Monroe affair was not well known is that back fifty years ago the press was very cordial their subjects. Remember there are scant photos of FDR in a wheelchair. But we know he was semi-paralyzed and in a chair for most of his life. But the press never showed that out of respect. I believe that the JFK incident
was very similar.

As for why Bush was not impeached I don't think it will serve
anyone to do that. I actually am quite against the radical democrats plans to do this. I don't think he is a competent person and don't think he is going to win any awards, but I don't think he deserves to be impeached. What would it do to segregate the country further? Realize that when we invaded Iraq under his flimsy pretenses of WMDs, Democrats AND Republicans universally stood by him. It was when the WMDs were not found and the War dragged on that they began to waiver and then turn. Also many of the things that went into Iraq were sanctioned by the congress and approved by the American people.

So I think if you bring up this question, you kind of have to ask the question. "If we have idiot for a ruler do we blame him for being one or ourselves for electing him?" Remember in 2004 he won the election against Kerry. Presidents don't just materialize they have to be elected. I think the American public is to blame every bit as much as the Bush Administration for what they have done.

Answer 6

Puh-leeze! Can we get our facts straight?

Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted. He lied when asked if he had sex with Monica Lewinsky, but that lie was not perjury because it was not germane to the case (which was thrown out of court). He was impeached because the Republican majority in the House at that time WANTED to impeach him very, very badly.

Bush has not been impeached because the Republicans have controlled Congress for most of his presidency. To convict him you'd need a 2/3 majority of the Senate willing to vote "Guilt." That doesn't exist. It would be a waste of time to try.

Did Clinton commit an impeachable offense? In the eyes of the majority of the Senate, no. The charge of obstructing justice by not admitting an extramarital affair seems very tenuous to me--especially since the question was not relevant to the issue about which he was under oath at the time.

Has Bush committed an impeachable offense? That is a matter of opinion. One can, IMO, make an argument for malfeasance and nonfeasance in office. But politically, it is not a feasible option.

Answer 7

Nobody ever suggested the possibility that President Clinton might be impeached for his sexual peccadilloes. Where did you ever get such a silly notion?
He did, however, commit perjury, and doing that normally lands people in prison.
Where is the evidence that President Bush has committed anything that even looks like a felony? I don't see any logical train in your thought processes.
And the bigotry in picking on his speech patterns ("nucular" is a common pronunciation in parts of the midwest and south) makes me wonder what other what other bigotries lie uncovered.

Answer 8

He wasn't impeached over having an affair, he was impeached over obstruction of justice and lying under oath. I firmly believe the Clinton impeachment was a spanking from Congress as a warning to future Presidents to keep it in their pants. Because even though he was impeached, he was not removed from office and I believe he can still hold public office.

Also, he was not that good of a president. In fact he was fairly hated, so much so they had to close down the streets around the White House to keep people from shooting at him. Or have you forgot the fella who crashed his plane into the White House.

Answer 9

Former U.S. President Slick Willie committed perjury--and as a result was fined for contempt of court, agreed to be disbarred, and was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998.

Answer 10

For a president to be impeached, he or she must commit a crime.

Lying under oath is one of those.

Regardless of any body's views on the war in Iraq, it is not "illegal", as it was approved by congress, whom are the one ones legally who can declare war.

Secondly, a persons ability to speak in public forums has nothing to do with illiteracy. To be illiterate, one must not be able to read, which obviously isn't true, since President G.W. Bush attended Yale, and Harvard, I believe.