President William Jefferson Bill Clinton appeared before the Senate on the 7th January 1999 to face an impeachment trial upon charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. He was the second president of the United States to face such impeachment charges. The trial began in the Senate presided over by the Chief Justice William Rehnquist. The trial started with the swearing in by the Chief Justice and the reading of the charges against President Clinton before the 100 senators. The opposing sides went and deliberated on who would present their evidence and considered the question as to whether to call live witnesses or not. However, the trial proper began on the 14th of January 1999 with the opening of the prosecution case delivered by House Manager James Sensenbrenner. The defense team of Clinton was headed by Counsel Cheryl Mills. Other members of the defense team included Charles Ruff, David Kendall, Nicole Seligman, Lanny Breuer, Bruce Lindsey, Daryl Bumper and Gregory Craig.
Major Arguments of the Defense
The first argument in aid of the defense of Clinton was put forward by wheelchair bound Charles Ruff on January the 19th who stated that the overzealous House Managers had fabricated a brew of charges and concocted witchcraft in bringing the charges against the president. He argued that the managers had rushed to judgment and also fudged with the facts to enable them suit their case against the president. He told the senators that they were at liberty to find that the conduct of the president was distasteful but the same did not constitute an offence in the nation’s history as to put the nation’s government at risk. On his part, Greg Craig for the defense refuted claims that Clinton committed perjury in his grand jury and that his only guilt was nitpicking and arguing with the prosecutors. The wrap up of the opening statement or arguments of the defense was made by the former Arkansas Senator Daryl Bumper. Bumper stated that the major problem with the House Managers was that the punishment sought-namely that of impeachment- was out of sync with the offence charged. He emphatically stated that when it is said that is not about sex, it is about the very same.
The defense counsel Cheryl Mills argued that the grand jury testimony offered by President Clinton had too many inconsistencies, as to form a clear and cogent case of perjury which he was then charged with. She further argued that the investigation of the matter had been tainted with political bias on the Republicans part and thus the proceedings and the intended impeachment was not in good faith. She further submitted that the president was by then enjoying high approval ratings from the public of above 70% which meant that he still had the ability and the confidence of the public to govern the country. In this respect, the defense counsel made the argument that the scandal that had emerged concerning the allegations did not impair or impact negatively on the ability of Clinton to govern the country as to necessitate an impeachment by the Senate. Finally, the defense counsel argued that the Managers or the prosecution had only presented an unsubstantiated case that was founded on circumstantial evidence and that the same did not meet the constitutional threshold as to found the removal of the president from office. On January 22 and the 23rd of January, questions were posed by the Senate members to the prosecution and Clinton’s defense counsel. The over 150 questions that were asked were written down and then given to the Chief Justice William Rehnquist to be read to the party being questioned.
On the 25th January, West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd moved motions to dismiss the articles of impeachment citing lack of merit. The senator also moved to call witnesses to the impeachment trial, a move that had been eschewed by the Senate all along. The Senate then voted to deliberate on both motions in a private session and in a public session vote, the two motions failed by a margin of 56-44. Over the 1stto 3rd of February 1999, the House Managers or prosecutors took videotaped depositions from witnesses. One of the witnesses whose depositions were taken was Monica Lewinsky, a former White House junior employee alleged to have engaged in a sexual affair with President Clinton and who was alleged to have committed perjury at the instance of Clinton. Another witness was a longtime friend and influential Washington lawyer Vernon Jordan and who was alleged to have solicited a job for Lewinsky in New York to avoid her questioning by the prosecution. The third witness was a White House aide by the name Sidney Blumenthal. The Senate, however, voted against calling live witnesses and stated that the excerpts of the videotaped evidence would be sufficient as testimony. These video tapes were played on the 6th of February in the Senate and featured a total of 30 excerpts of Lewinsky on her discussion of her affidavit in the Paula Jones case. The excerpts also revealed information about the small gifts that Clinton had given her as well as his involvement in enabling Lewinsky obtain a procurement job.
Important physical evidence presented at the trial was the blue dress by Lewinsky that contained a stain as a result of the sexual encounter with the president.
Closing statement
The Closing statement of the defense was made by White House Counsel Charles Ruff who argued that there was only one question before the Senate that of whether the continued stay in office of President Clinton posed risk to the liberties of the people. He summarized by urging the senators that if the continued stay on office of the president did not abridge the liberties of the people, then they must vote to acquit him. The perjury charge was defeated and the president was acquitted on the 12th of February.
Works Cited
Fiorina, M, S Abrams and J Pope. “The 2000 U.S. Presidential Election: Can Retrospective Voting Be Saved?” British Journal of Political Science (2007): 163-187.
Mitchell, Alison. “Impeachment: Overview — Clinton Impeached: He faces a Senate Trial, 2nd in History, He vows to deliver till the term’s last hour .” New York Times 20 12 2006: 1-3.
Popp, KA. “The Impeachment of President Clinton: An Ugly Mix of Three Powerful Forces.” Law and Contemporary Problems (2010): 67-74.
Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!
