Nixon led to Clinton and then Bush/Cheney

  • News
  • Thread starter Rothiemurchus
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Led
In summary, the conversation discussed the possibility of deterring leaders from breaking the law by imprisoning President Nixon for his actions during the Watergate scandal. However, it was pointed out that Nixon's situation did not directly affect Clinton's situation, as they were accused of different crimes. It was also noted that Clinton was impeached for lying under oath and obstructing justice, but ultimately acquitted. The conversation also touched on the idea of resolving issues in a non-political environment and the outcomes of the Clinton impeachment.
  • #1
Rothiemurchus
203
1
If President Nixon had been imprisoned for breaking the law it would have set a precedent that would have deterred Clinton from lying to Congress and Bush and Cheney too.Isn't it about time leaders got locked up for law breaking or else what is the point of the law?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Rothiemurchus said:
If President Nixon had been imprisoned for breaking the law it would have set a precedent that would have deterred Clinton from lying to Congress and Bush and Cheney too.Isn't it about time leaders got locked up for law breaking or else what is the point of the law?

Nixon's and Clinton's situations were completely different. Nixon's situation didn't affect Clinton's situation.

Nixon was accused of obstructing an investigation into crimes that affected the fairness of elections, misusing government agencies, such as the IRS and FBI, to persecute political opponents, and ignoring Congressional subpoenas. It's very doubtful Nixon would have been found guilty of the last, because there was a divided opinion about whether the President should be required to respond to Congressional subpoenas. He would have almost certainly been found guilty of the first two articles. Whatever deterrence a conviction would have provided, being forced to resign as President (because of the inevitability of being found guilty) provided nearly equal deterrence.

Clinton was accused of lying about sexual relations with an intern and obstructing an investigation into sexual harrassment claims. The sexual harrassment case was a civil case (not a criminal case) that still proceeded independently of the impeachment and was eventually dismissed. While Clinton may have made a crude sexual advance to Paula Jones in a hotel room, she failed to show any evidence that could relate a single sexual advance into harrassment. Even if guilty of sexual harrassment while governor of Arkansas, the only impact it would have on his job as President of the US is that a lot of people would be muttering that they would have liked to know that during the last election.

Edit: And I think Clinton was actually charged with lying to investigators in the sexual harrassment case, not Congress.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
And I think Clinton was actually charged with lying to investigators in the sexual harrassment case, not Congress.
Yes. Clinton was impeached for (allegedly some might say) lying under oath (perjury) to the grand jury and obstruction of justice.

Upon the passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998, by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228-206 vote) and obstruction of justice (by a 221-212 vote), . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton#Impeachment_by_the_House_of_Representatives
 
  • #4
BobG said:
Clinton was accused of lying about sexual relations with an intern and obstructing an investigation into sexual harrassment claims.
It's not good to be accused of jaywalking and murder, even if you weren't jaywalking.
 
  • #5
holy crap the guy got a blowjob, how can you possibly compare that to crimes against humanity?? (torture, imperialistic warfare etc...)
 
  • #6
Isn't the bottom line here that leaders would be less inclined to do wrong if the law was rigrously applied - Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon - he could have got him tried in court.Nixon was a friend of Ford - this looks bad - it is bad!
 
  • #7
Rothiemurchus said:
Isn't the bottom line here that leaders would be less inclined to do wrong if the law was rigrously applied - Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon - he could have got him tried in court.Nixon was a friend of Ford - this looks bad - it is bad!

Having the issue resolved in a court of law would have had some benefit. For one thing, the 'lesson' of Watergate is that the cover-up was worse than the crime. That ignores the second article of impeachment.

Focusing on the first article rather than the second suggests that many politicians saw Watergate as a politically motivated move rather than a legitimate investigation of potential crimes.

You hear the 'lessons' of Watergate rehashed all the time. None of Clinton's 'crimes' affected his presidency, but alledged attempts to block the investigation led to impeachment. No one was prosecuted for leaking Plame's name, but Libby was found guilty of obstructing the investigation into the leak.

Unless the facts are resolved in a non-political environment, every investigation into wrong doing is perceived as a political attack designed to trip someone up into committing a trivial, but real crime.
 
  • #8
As I remember (or disremember) it, Clinton was sued for harassment. During the trial he was asked certain questions which were to determine whether there was a pattern of such behavior. I believe that while under oath he lied in order to hide that pattern. If so, that would leave him open to a charge of perjury. No such charge was brought. Regardless of the political implications, the implications for the harassment suit were clear. Clinton could not continue to pursue his defense and he settled.
 
  • #9
jimmysnyder said:
As I remember (or disremember) it, Clinton was sued for harassment. During the trial he was asked certain questions which were to determine whether there was a pattern of such behavior. I believe that while under oath he lied in order to hide that pattern. If so, that would leave him open to a charge of perjury. No such charge was brought. Regardless of the political implications, the implications for the harassment suit were clear. Clinton could not continue to pursue his defense and he settled.

The case was dismissed. When it appeared that an appeals court might grant the appeal Clinton settled for $850,000 to drop the appeal.

He was impeached for denying having "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky during his deposition. He was allowed to review the legal definition of "sexual relations" and concluded that oral sex was not "sexual relations".

BTW he was acquitted.

When he left office he had his law license suspended for 5 years.

Now he is the most popular man in the word, and Paula Jones is being called trailor trash by non other than Ann Coulter. :rofl:

Of the $850,000 about $600,000 was legal expenses.

She bought a house and then posed for Penthouse to pay the taxes.
 
  • #10
Skyhunter said:
The case was dismissed. When it appeared that an appeals court might grant the appeal Clinton settled for $850,000 to drop the appeal.
Thanks for clearing that up. I hadn't realized this.

Skyhunter said:
He was impeached for denying having "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky during his deposition.
This page shows 4 versions of the bill connected with the impeachment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.RES.611:
The exact wording of the charge on the first of these is:
H.RES 611.RH said:
On August 17, 1998, William Jefferson Clinton swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before a Federal grand jury of the United States. Contrary to that oath, William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury concerning one or more of the following: (1) the nature and details of his relationship with a subordinate Government employee; (2) prior perjurious, false and misleading testimony he gave in a Federal civil rights action brought against him; (3) prior false and misleading statements he allowed his attorney to make to a Federal judge in that civil rights action; and (4) his corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of witnesses and to impede the discovery of evidence in that civil rights action.
In other words, denying would not have been an issue if it hadn't been perjury. I don't mean to imply that he perjured himself, only that he was impeached for that reason.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
Court Rebuffs F.C.C. on Fines for Indecency
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/05/business/media/05decency.html
WASHINGTON, June 4 — If President Bush and Vice President Cheney can blurt out vulgar language, then the government cannot punish broadcast television stations for broadcasting the same words in similarly fleeting contexts.
:rofl: :rolleyes: I tell my children not to act like Bush or Cheney.

Nixon also apparently used colorful language.
 

1. How did Nixon's actions lead to Clinton and then Bush/Cheney?

Nixon's resignation in 1974 due to the Watergate scandal created a political vacuum in the Republican party. This led to the rise of more conservative politicians, including Ronald Reagan, who eventually became President in 1981. Reagan's policies and actions, such as the Iran-Contra affair, paved the way for George H.W. Bush to become President in 1989. Bush's son, George W. Bush, then became President in 2001, followed by Dick Cheney as his Vice President.

2. What was the impact of Nixon's resignation on the Republican party?

Nixon's resignation caused a shift in the Republican party towards more conservative ideals and policies. This led to the rise of politicians like Ronald Reagan and the eventual election of George H.W. Bush as President. This also had a long-term impact on the party's image and reputation, as it was associated with the Watergate scandal and corruption.

3. How did Clinton's presidency connect to Nixon and Bush/Cheney?

Clinton's presidency was heavily influenced by the political climate created by Nixon and the subsequent Republican administrations. His impeachment in 1998 was partly due to his involvement in the Whitewater scandal, which was connected to the Watergate scandal. Additionally, Clinton's policies and actions, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Balkan Wars, were partly a response to the policies of Reagan and Bush.

4. What were the similarities between Nixon, Clinton, and Bush/Cheney's presidencies?

All three presidents faced scandals and controversies during their time in office. Nixon's Watergate scandal and Clinton's impeachment are well-known examples, while the Bush/Cheney administration was marred by controversies such as the Iraq War and the response to Hurricane Katrina. Additionally, all three presidents faced opposition and criticism from the opposing party, leading to political gridlock and polarization.

5. How did the political climate created by Nixon affect future presidencies?

The political climate created by Nixon's presidency had a significant impact on future presidencies. It led to a shift in the Republican party towards more conservative ideals and policies, as well as increased public scrutiny of government actions. It also contributed to a general distrust of politicians and government institutions, which has continued to affect politics in the United States to this day.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
69
Views
7K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
56
Views
10K
Back
Top