The impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton should be nullified

[Mme. Defarge]

if it is true that a sitting POTUS cannot be held responsible for committing any crime.

[Yavin4]

1. And an official apology should be issued as well

both from Congress and the media.

[Poiuyt]

2. It should be nullified simply because it was frivolous in the first place.

[unblock]

3. the senate didn't convict him, so it amounted to nothing as far as congress is concerned.

republicans are actually allowing that a president can be impeached and removed, an easy "concession" for them to make knowing full well that there are enough republican toadies in the senate to block conviction and removal.

but what they're now trying to do is to say a president can't be indicted or even investigated while president.


which, of course, would allow a president to commit any number of crimes, including crimes to get elected or re-elected and even crimes to prevent impeachment and removal (e.g., killing senators, blackmailing them, kidnapping their children, etc.).


yeah, sounds just like what the founders had in mind....

[stopbush]

6. But he was impeached.

[unblock]

8. what does it mean to "nullify" an impeachment from which he's already been cleared?

[stopbush]

9. It takes it off the books, like when a judge expunges a record.

It’s a legal confirmation that it never happened. History would then be rewritten.

[sarisataka]

10. So let's send this over

To Winston Smith at the Ministry of Truth to get the correct story into the history books

[unblock]

11. in what meaningful way?

as if history would forget he had been impeached?

this is silly.

getting an indictment expunged from a criminal record has a meaningful impact on someone, even if that person has been found not guilty at trial.

how does some legal proceeding declaring that clinton's impeachment was somehow improper affect anything? is he having trouble getting a job because he can't pass a background check?

this is all very ridiculous.

[Baitball Blogger]

4. They used a private lawsuit to put their foot in the door.

The media and a very determined united Republican House, Republican special prosecutor and a Republican Attorney General did the rest.

I never again want to see a Democratic president appoint Republicans to the top offices of our legal and criminal justice system. Our country is too divided for that kind of self-flagellating move.

[former9thward]

5. Janet Reno was the Attorney General for the entire Clinton presidency.

She was a Democrat. Ken Starr was appointed by a three judge panel of the federal DC Circuit. Clinton did not appoint any Repubicans to top positions (or any positions) in the justice department.

[Baitball Blogger]

12. Confused George tenet's appointment.

CIA director.

[in2herbs]

13. I may be mistaken but I don't believe we've ever had a democrat as FBI Director. nt

[Catherine Vincent]

7. Imo, it should have been nullified when Bush Jr

...was in office. Clinton's misdemeanor was censure worthy at best.

[onenote]

14. There is no process for "nullifying" an impeachment

any more than there would be a process for a subsequent Senate to "nullify" a conviction.

It's a silly notion.

Presumably the OP was inspired by reports that Trump is suing to block the NY State investigation. But even if that suit had merit, it wouldn't mean anything with respect to the Clinton impeachment, which did not involve a state criminal process. It involved impeachment by the House, and the Trump lawsuit doesn't challenge the right of the House to investigate a president for criminal actions - indeed, it points to the impeachment process as the only proper way of investigating a pursuing a sitting president.

So the OP suggestion is not only silly, it's a non-sequitur.