Skip to comments.Feinstein in 1999: Bill Clinton 'Gave False or Misleading Testimony'
Posted on 10/12/2016 10:13:26 AM PDT by Kaslin
Seventeen years ago, as a Republican-controlled Senate concluded its impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., expressed her concerns about how future generations would perceive what had happened.
Feinstein -- along with every other Senate Democrat and five Republicans -- voted on Feb. 12, 1999 that Clinton was "not guilty" of either of the two Articles of Impeachment the House brought against him.
"Clinton acquitted but tarnished forever by impeachment," said an Associated Press headline the next day.
"[T]he Senate, with Democrats solidly in his camp, acquitted him on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice," said the AP story.
But Feinstein had recruited 37 other senators, including some Republicans, to co-sponsor a resolution she hoped the Senate would pass to "censure" Clinton.
"[D]uring these trying days," Feinstein said, according to the Congressional Record, "the question has been asked of many of us: 'What will we tell our children about this sordid period in our Nation's history?'"
Future Secretary of State John Kerry co-sponsored Feinstein's resolution. So did future Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin and future Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.
So, what did Feinstein's resolution say?
As recorded in the Congressional Record, it said: "Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, gave false or misleading testimony and his actions have had the effect of impeding discovery of evidence in judicial proceedings;
"Whereas William Jefferson Clinton's conduct in this matter, is unacceptable for a President of the United States, does demean the Office of the President as well as the President himself, and creates disrespect for the laws of the land ...
"Whereas future generations of Americans must know that such behavior is not acceptable but also bears grave consequences, including the loss of integrity, trust and respect ..."
In one of its final paragraphs, it resolved: "That the United States Senate recognizes the historic gravity of this bipartisan resolution and trusts and urges that future congresses will recognize the importance of allowing this bipartisan statement of censure and condemnation to remain intact for all time."
Republican Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas, who had voted that Clinton was "guilty" of both Articles of Impeachment, moved to block Feinstein's resolution from coming up for a vote. Feinstein needed 60 votes to overcome Gramm's move. She only got 56. But every Senate Democrat -- except Robert Byrd of West Virginia -- voted with her.
Two months later, a headline in The New York Times said: "Clinton is Found to Be in Contempt on Jones Lawsuit."
"A federal judge held President Clinton in contempt of court today, saying he had willfully provided false testimony under oath about his relationship with Monica S. Lewinsky in the sexual misconduct lawsuit filed by Paula Corbin Jones," said the first paragraph of the Times' story.
"The court takes no pleasure whatsoever in holding this nation's president in contempt of court," the Times quoted from Judge Susan Webber Wright's ruling.
"The record demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the president responded to plaintiffs' questions by giving false, misleading and evasive answers that were designed to obstruct the judicial process," the judge said, according to the Times.
Two years after that, on the day President Clinton left office, a New York Times story carried this headline: "Exiting Job, Clinton Accepts Immunity Deal."
"In a stunning end to the long melodrama and pitched legal battles over President Clinton's relationship with a White House intern, Mr. Clinton today agreed to a settlement in which he will avoid the possibility of indictment in exchange for admitting that he gave false testimony under oath and agreeing to surrender his law license for five years," the Times reported.
Sen. Slade Gorton, R.-Wash., who voted that Clinton was "not guilty" on the first Article of Impeachment but "guilty" on the second, predicted serious consequences for America if Clinton was not removed.
"The Republic will not be weakened if we convict," he said, according to the Congressional Record.
"But if we acquit, if we say that some perjuries, some obstructions of justice, some clear and conscious violations of a formal oath are free from our sanction, the Republic and its institutions will be weakened," said Gorton.
"One exception or excuse will lead to another, the right of the most powerful of our leaders to act outside the law -- or in violation of the law -- will be established," he said.
"Our republican institutions will be seriously undermined," he said. "They have been undermined already, and the damage accrues to all equally -- Republicans, Democrats, liberals and conservatives."
The ice cold tyrant’s husband wasn’t guilty of perjury, just of giving false testimony under oath.
Clinton perjured himself. He was convicted in a court of law, lost his law license, and was fined for it.
That is not only true. It is factual
“One exception or excuse will lead to another, the right of the most powerful of our leaders to act outside the law — or in violation of the law — will be established,” he said.
Yep, and now we are at the point an FBI director can say with a straight face to 300 million Americans, “No competent lawyer would take this case.”
Just like the stock market, I will be glad when we finally bottom out and begin to have good government again.
Never forget it was Trent Lott and his Republican buddies that refused to hold a full Senate trial for the Bent One.
Yeah, but you know why? The reason was because Al Gore would have become president and no one wanted that.
Unfortunately, this article combines all of these elements into a single timeline. It should be noted that the lawsuit brought by Paula Jones was delayed so that it wouldn’t interfere with or influence the impeachment trial. So that finding of perjury was not a part of impeachment. Some 4 months after impeachment, Judge Wright made her judgment: guilty of perjury, disbarred, loss of law license, $800,000 fine... but by then, the public opinion had been forged: impeached but not guilty. It’s nice to be a democrat.
STROLL DOWN MEMORY LANE
One Clinton lies .....
"I never had sexual relations with that woman...Miss Lewinsky."
...... and the other one swears to it.
VINTAGE TIME COVER The Clintons leave the WH
arm-in-arm after Bill got lewinskied. Plotting to exploit
Bill's BJ for votes, the Clintons' political apparat never faltered.
Hillary later went on network TV all decked out in virginal pearls,
denying everything, blaming Billy's B/J on "an invention of a VRWC."
Bill later admitted to it, was impeached, and disbarred.
He had to pay Paula Jones 800,000 dollars.
"Incidentally Chelsea, did your kindly sensitive parents tell you the reason you were being hustled off (in that classic "smiling Clinton solidarity pose" on the vintage TIME cover?) Did mom and dad tell you daddy got a BJ in the Oval office? Did they explain the details of a BJ to you?
Maybe Chelsea was not allowed to read the Daily News?
Ironically, from purely partisan interests of the Demagogue Party, they would have been better off getting Bill Clinton removed from office and having Albore become POTUS. Albore likely would have been elected in 2000 and 2004, thus no GW Bush. Ofc, alternate histories are always speculative, and who knows what would have happened from 2008 onward, probably no Obama as that 2008 campaign unfolded. I’m just saying that Democrap prospects in 2000 and 2004 probably would have been much improved had Albore replaced Bill Clinton in 1999. Under the 22nd Amendment Albore would still have been eligible to be elected twice to presidential terms, after serving out the remainder of Bill Clinton’s 2nd term.
IF the Senate had stuck with the House (Hyde and the rest
of them in the House of Representatives), BILL CLINTON
would have been REMOVED FOR GOOD along with his ball-
busting WIFE, HITLER-Y.
NOW, all these years later; the corrupt Senate is still
colluding with the CORRUPT CLINTONS to conspire to keep
the CLINTONS in perpetual power. I’m hoping and praying
that some chickens will come home to roost and soon!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.