Transcripts For CSPAN3 President Bill Clinton Impeachment - Senate Trial 20240713

We had never seen anything like trial was e the last in the 1860s. What do you remember about what how all of this transpired the next month . The senate trial was fascinating because of the idea but it is ed a trial not a legal proceeding and it is very political. It had so many interesting dynamic characters involved. Bird of West Virginia scholar constitutional and not a supporter or friend of bill clinton in any particular way, he ended up at one point throwing up his hands and saying this should not have even happened, the trial is misguided and he even told his colleagues he was going to introduce a otion to dismiss the whole thing. Different senators played different roles. Managers were ascinating the president s legal team was interesting. He had a strong array of legal and tried to sort some, put some english on the ball because he wanted to he had women as his legal representation. Own personal russ was the k and he use counsel relied on them to give this assionate idea about how wrong headed this enterprise was to remove a president for what they arguing was personal fails nd that the president had not failed the American People and he had worked for them and it this president that he is monica ng it denigrate lewinsky or the witnesses. E tried to stay out of that even as hot headed as he was about the process about the of trying to deny it. A played it politically in we are t way than seeing. Biography it says only the second president to face and it will be forever part of his presidency. There are so many unusual things because he turned to his carry the banner. If you remember when the rticles of impeachment failed first Lady Hillary Clinton was sitting down in the white house ickes one of his advisors talking about the launched in new york a state she never represented or lived in. Bill clinton was counting on the the of being be a solved by senate, not convicted but he turned to his wife in some ways present left to the electorate. Popular thane more when he came in. He day he was up paoefrped in the house he was at 73 approval and Hillary Clinton went on to seat in the senate and won and was considered and some sympathy votes. He styled that probably discomforting because she was such a feminist. Simple was considered a sympathetic figure. Justiceole of the chief i remember seeing him with the bars. Robe and gold that was his own personal touch in the Supreme Court. Loved opera and he had orrowed this idea of the gold braid on his robe from one of operas. Rite he had them custom made. His touch. As i said, he tried to retreat the public perspective of being the manager but the in the is specified goes totion and if this is the senate if we are seeing a tkhraochief justice john oberts would be in the chair managing what would become a trial. Host during this time for 36 there was no other underfor the senate. This was priority one. Supreme Court Essentially on hold until the chief justice could return. Guest absolutely. All of that didnt get freed until february. The chief s i think justice behind the scenes during paperwork with the for the Supreme Court but the cases or any of action was on pause. Ne of the residence we are talking about this in an interesting way now is because sure where xactly this time line will go and we are heading into an election. Talking about jurors we rving as are talking about five president ial candidates who their e anchored to chairs potentially in a very interesting time. In a we are going to hear moment from congressman lindsey dale bumpers. We talked about them previously set up these two and what their role was and what you remember. Lindsay graham was a republican from South Carolina one of ouse and he was the managers of the case because he had been on the house jew chair jew tkeuudiciary he gave passionate theches about the idea that president had violated his oath office and impeachment was a way to cleanse the office. Debate that were pwaoefplt was not envisioned by he framers to cleanse the office. That is what voters do. At the is what he felt time because the report from ken st tarr had come to the republicans with details involved and the president s obstruct justice which he was obviously impeached for, that this ongly needed to move forward. From umpers as a senator arc arkansas, a democrat was the candidate nd by arguing that he was many despicable andas poor judgment and he asked the senators here are some of my had a long list f negative adjectives for what president clinton will done with an intern as president but he impeachable ot because he said whenever you say it is not about section it is about section and e said it was a perform behavior and he personal behavior and he said we are all and he scanned the eyes of the peers, the senate he made a very someone from e as the same state and someone the knew well over decades and someone who had left the strong repute just days before literally and it was days he had hing left. Host as this is playing out on television you are at the white house. What is president clinton doing . Uest president clinton was following this very intensely. Now and we say thank goodness social media ition exist because didnt exist because he left it opine aboutgates to the injury and injustice of all it. This and complain about but he felt that a strong part f his tactic is because he was so popular and his job approval was so high and the economy was he argument again and again look what im doing. Im traveling around the country the nations bills and im still the business and dealing with international affairs. He was trying to persuade the a rican people he was doing good job and he had not betrayed them. He as still doing the job was elected to do and he kept saying and said this after he acquitted as well that he would continue to represent their interests to the last hour the last day. What was interesting though is hile he left office very popular, it was the case that after impeachment democrats were hamstrung to get more legislation through congress so final two years may have looked like he was popular but it was not like they had enough congress to get a lot of legislation through. Thank you for your perspective. More from the senate trial january of 1999. It live on cspan 2 and two key players lindsay South Carolina and former senator and democrat dale bumpers of arkansas. Mr. President and members of he senate, i announce the preside presence of the managers on the part of the house of conduct atives to proceedings concerning the impeachment of William Jefferson president of the United States. Managers on the part of the house will be received and escorted to the well of the senate. Will make t of arms the proclamation. All persons are commanded to silent on pain of improvement while the house of representatives is exhibiting to senate of the United States articles of impeachment against Jefferson Clinton, president of the United States. The managers on the part of the house will proceed. Mr. President the managers to present ready the articles of impeachment eferred by the house of representatives against William J Clinton president of the generates. Following dopted the resolution with the permission f the senate i will read resolve that in continuance of the authority confident in House Resolution 614 of the 105th by the house of representatives and delivered on december,mr. Hyde, sensen berner florida and of [reading a list of names] are appointed managers to onduct the impeachment trial against William Jefferson clinton president of the United States. Isnt to the be enate to inform the senate of these appointments and they in the conduct of the trial exhibit the articles of impeachment to the senate and take all other which may ssary include the following. Mploying legal clerkal and ear assist and incurring other expenses as may be necessary to amounts available to the committee on the resolutions or from the applicable accounts of he house of representatives to sending persons and papers and file being with the secretary of of the te on the part house of reference any pleadings in conjunction with or to the exhibition of the articles of impeachment that the managers consider necessary. With the permission of the senate i will read the articles impeachment. House resolution 611 resolved Jefferson Clinton president of the United States is impeached for high crimes and and following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States senate. Articles of impeachment exhibited by the house of representatives of the United America in the name of itself and of the people of the againsttates of america William Jefferson clinton president of the United States f america in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for lie crimes and article one. In his conduct while president of the United States William Clinton in violation f his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of the United States and and defend thect constitution of the united tates and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully has willfully corrupted and manipulated the judicial for his personal gain nd exoneration impeding the segregation of justice in that n august 17, 1998, William Jefferson clinton swore to tell the truth the whole truth and othing but the truth before a federal grand jury of the United States. Jefferson to William Clinton willfully false and m isleading testimony to the grand jury concerning one or more of the following. Ne, the nature and details his relationship with a subordinate government employee. Wo prior families and misleading testimony he gave in action l civil rights brought against him. Hree prior families and misleading prior false and misleading statement he allowed attorney to make and his corrupt efforts to influence the estimony of witnesses and to impede the discovery of evidence in that civil Rights Action. William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the ntegrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the presidency, has betrayed his acted in resident and a manner subversive of the rule manifest stice to the injury of the people of the United States. Wherev for he warrants impeachment and trial and emoval from office and qualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust and United States. E article two, in his conduct united esident of the states William Jefferson clinton in violation of his onstitutional over the faithfully to execute the office of president of the united his s and to the best of ability preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the violation es and in of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be as hfully executed prevented, obstructed and impeded the administration of to that end as engaged personally and through a subordinates and agent in course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony related federal civil Rights Action rought against him in a duly it included t and one or more of the following acts. One, on or about december 17, clinton liam jefferson corrupt lyon couraged a corru a witness ncouraged in an action against him to execute a sworn affidavit in knew to eeding that he be perjurious and false. December 17, 1997, william encourageed a on itness in an action to give perju perjurious false and misleading testimony when called to personally. Three, on or about december 28, 1997, William Jefferson clinton corruptly engaged in and schemeged or supported a to conceal evidence that had been subpoenaed in a federal action brought against him. Four, beginning on or about 1997, and continuing through and including january 1998, William Jefferson clinton intensified and secureed in an effort to job assistance to a witness in a federal civil Rights Action him in order to corruptly prevent the truthful in imony of that witness that proceeding at a time when that uthful testimony of witness would have within locker room ful would have been harmful to him. Ive january 17, 1998 at his deposition in a federal civil Rights Action against almost illiam j clinton corruptly allowed his attorney to make false appear misleading tatements to a federal judge characterizing an affidavit in order to prevent questioning judge. Relevant by the such false and misleading statements were subsequently attorney in by his a communication to that judge. January 18 and 21, 1998. , William Jefferson clinton false and misleading account of events related to an action against almost to a in that witness proceeding in order to corruptly influence the testimony of that witness witness. On or about january 21, 23 and 1998, women william jeff can clinton made false statements in a proceeding to influence the testimony of those witnesses. The false and misleading by william ade Jefferson Clinton were repeated by the witnesses to the grand costing the causing the to receive false and mis leadi misleading information. The office and brought disrepute on the trust ncy, betrayed his and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice the manifest injury of the people of the United States. William jefferson impeachment and trial and removal from office nd qualification it hold any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. House of reserves 1998. Ber 19, Newt Gingrich attest. Robin h. Karl clerk. That completes the exhibition of impeachment of against William Jefferson clinton president. The managers request that the take order for the trial. The managers request leave to withdraw. Thank you, mr. Manager hyde. The senate will notify the house when it is atives ready to proceed. The senate will come to order. The senators will take their seats. Will remove themselves from the floor. The the previous order arrived1 00 p. M. Having and quorum established the senate will proceed to consideration of the articles of impeachment against William Jefferson clinton president of the United States. Mr. President. At this time pursuant to rule 4 the rules on impeachment and United States constitution the will ding officer administer the oath to William Justice of chief the United States. The previous order the committee will conduct the chief United States to the dais to be administered the oath. Please to welcome you. Attend the senate in conformity with your notice you he purpose of joining with the trial of the president of the United States and im now ready to take oath. Will you place your left hand on the bible and raise your right hand. Duly hief justice was sworn sworn] at this time i will dminister the oath to all senators in the chamber in conformance with article 1, to the 3, clause 6 constitution. And the Senate Impeachment rules. Senators now stand and raise your right hand. Sworn]enators were duly andlerk will call the names record the responses. To judge our president. We are here to say whether or guilty to begin with. Some serious offenses that are by sex and theres an absolutely no way to get around that. It is uncomfortable to listen to. Owned a and mother restaurant, a beer joint is what e would say in South Carolina, i can remember that if you are black you came and you had to beer and you had to go because you couldnt drink it there. Is is just the way it was with my dad said. I always never quite understood and mom were good people. That is just the way it was. Now is not the way it is and we are better off for that. It isual harassment cases always uncomfortable to listen to. Thats just the way it is. It used to be in this country long evening there was really no recourse if you were sexually harassed. We changed things for the better. The reason we are here today is not because somebody wanted to of into the personal life the president for no good reason. E are here today because somebody accused him when he was picking them out of a crowd, asking her to come to a hotel room, and, if you believe did something very crude and rude that you wouldnt want o happen to anybody in your family. Now, own god knows what happened there. Settled. Has been the parties know and god knows. We will never know. Of my country where you as a lowlevel sue the governor of your state and if the and becomes overnor president you can still sue. 90 a reme court said mr. President , you will stand subject to this suit. Talk about is this private or public conduct, the heart of o being president or is it just some private matter he could be he gets out of office . S this really big deal about being president . I would contend to you it became a big deal about being president he raised the defense you cant sue me now because im the president. Im a busy man. I have a lot going on. He used his office or tried to, the day in court. No, he Supreme Court said sir, you will stand subject to uit under some reasonable accommodations. And we are here today. If i had been on the Supreme Court i dont know if i would have ruled that way. Not much chance of that happening any time soon if you are worried about that. To bet think thats going in my future. I may not have ruled that we and congress, if we dont like the way this has come out we can law, change that ruling by law. But it is the law of the because the chief justice and his colleaguing said so. Do . T did our president he tried to say you are cant sue me because im president. Participated in that lawsuit because he was told to and i would argue, ladies and we all assumed fair. Uld play a lot doubt ere about that . Ladies and gentlemen of the not shownat if he had up . Whether if he refused what if going to play, thats it. Im not going to listen to you, branch. You know Judicial Branch. He remedy we have when president ial conduct gets out of bounds, you know where that remedy lies . Us, the United States congress. Gets out of ent bounds and doesnt do as he or constitutional ly, and i would argue that every has dent and every citizen a constitutional duty not to citizen especially the president and they get out putounds, it is up to us to them back in bounds or declare it illegal. How do we regulate president ial done in a when it is personal fashion . Through the laws and powers of impeachment. That is why we are here today. Going to take teamwork on ur part to get this right, because i will argue to you in a moment that the president of the nited states, through his conduct, flouted judicial and Decision Making over him. To lie, when he evidencemanipulate the of the friends against him and et his friends to lie for him he vetoed that decision. It is worse than if he had not shown up at all. That out of bounds . That is what we are going to be we have bout today and some guidance as to what really is in our out of bounds for high government owe finishes. What is officials. Crime . S a high how about in an important person low means. Ody of that is not very scholarly. Truth. Hink it is the i think that is what they meant by high crimes. Be a crime. Have to it is just when you use your office and you are acting in a hurts people you have committed a high crime. When you decide that a course of meets the high crime constitutioner our for the president , what are we doing to the presidency . I think we are putting a burden on the presidency and you should consider it that way. That if you determine that the case t and crimes in this are high crimes, you need to do so knowing that you are placing burden on every future and the of that Office Office itself. O, do so cautiously because one branch of the government should never put a another branch of the government that is not fair and they cant bear. Ladies and gentlemen of the senate, if you decided from the of this president that hence forth any Office Holder office of s the president will have this burden tell you what it is. Dont lie under oath to a jury when many in the country are begging you not to. Occupant bear that burden . I voted against article two in he house which was the deposition perjury allegations against the president standing alone. I think many of us may have thought that he didnt know the deeps, that he and sky lewinsky thought they had a story that and he got caught off guard and started telling a lies. Of that is personal talking about int it is e things and human nature. Charged he is eighte is charged of of a months later. They said mr. President if you go into that federal grand jury you lie again you are risking your presidency. People said that. Legal commentators. Professor dershwitz i think we agree on a lot but i think he would agree with that. Like passionate people even if i dont agree, you go to d that if the grand jury and you lie as president that ought to be a crime. So, the context in which you are tong to decide this case has understand human failings. Because if you dont do that you fair. T being and i know you want to be fair. Fails exist in all of us. Nly when it gets to be so premeditated and calculated, so over anybody st else or the public be damned hould he really, really start getting serious about what to do. That happened in office in my opinion, ladies and gentlemen. Being begged not to lie to a grand jury and in this matter to lie, that is the burden you would be placing on president. Dont do that. Dont lie under oath when you a lawsuit dant in against an average citizen. Have the courage to apply the in a fair manner to yourself. T was talked about values appear courage. Let me Say Something about president clinton that i believe. He does embrace civil rights for hurry citizens an i believe hes been articulate spokes plan for civil and thatr our citizens could be one of the hallmarks of this presidency. m here to tell you that when it was his case, when those him,ts had to be applied to he failed miserably. About lways easy to talk what other people ought to do. Waytest of character is the you judge people you disagree with. Cheat in a lawsuit by manipulating the testimony of others. Officials and ic friends to tell your lies before avoid al grand jury to your legal responsibilities. Dont put your legal an of theal interests ahead decency. Aw and common if you find these are lie crimes hats the burden you are placing placing on the next Office Holder. Be nt want my country to the country of great quivocators and compartmentalizers for the tphebnext that is what this case is about. I have described to you as the conduct of the president is g a high crime i think just a job description. We are asking no more of him law to be the chief enforcement officer of the land. Follow year job description. A determination that this conduct is a high crime is no that cant be beared in a future le fashion by occupants. What did i talk about constitutional teamwork . A child of the south. The civil rights litigation and atters that came about in the 1960s were threefold. In e was legislation passed congress. There was judicial decisions that were rendered. Executive branch came in to help out. Remember we governor wallace was doors of the e university of alabama . How he was told to get aside . What went on . Constitutional dance of magnificent proportions. You had litigation that was for the individual require o they could the rights and full bits of a citizen of that state. This d legislation out of body and you had defiance against a federal government and you hadte level the president and executive federalizing the national gua guard. And governor wallace stepped aside. When it was 90 that bill be a participant he chose to and in every manner you could his conduct needs to be egulated and brought to bear under the constitution. And if you put him in jail after lso office, that would not solve the constitutional problem he created. The constitutional conduct by the executive when he was told by the Judicial Branch you have to participant a lawsuit was so far afield of what is fair and what is high that it became a crime. It happened to be against a lower person. He senate has respond before about perjury and obstruction of and how it applies to and overnment officials those government officials were judges. Analysis itart this is important to know some of ou know this b i hope to know the history of this senate and body and how it works and why it works. When a judge is impeached the United States the same Legal Standard of treason, high misdemeanors is applied to that judges conduct as it is to any high official the president. So we are comparing apples to apples. Claibornes trial at the seized on the language Judges Office during r good pwhraufior and behavior was trying to say unlike the president and ther high government officials the impeachment standard for judges is Good Behavior. That is the term. It is a differing standard. You know these cases better than know these cases. Nd you said wrong he Good Behavior standard doesnt apply to why you will be removed. A reference to how long you will have your job. Terms. Sident has two a judge is for life conditioned behavior. What gets you out of office is whether or not you violate the standard for impeachment which is treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors. So as i talk to you about these cases and what you as a body did we are using the same Legal Standard not because i said so said so. Se you claiborne convicted and removed from office by the 907 for what . Filing a false income tax penalties of perjury. One thing they said in that case w im a judge and returns lse income tax has nothing to do with me being a judge. And i ought not lose my job unless you can prove that i did wrong as a judge. They were saying cheating on taxes has nothing to do with being a judge. You know what the senate said . It has everything to do with being a judge. And reason you said that is thisse you didnt buy into idea that the only way you can lose year job as a high official under the constitution is to engage in type of public conduct directly related to what you do every day. Broader view. Tle next chart, please. A broader view and im certainly glad you did. Country ofs is not a high officials who are technicians. Based on country character and based on having to et a standard that others will followingly. Is manager fish. Judge claibornes actions raised fundamental questions about Public Confidence in the federal system. They served to undermine the confidence of the people in the system. L he is more a mere embarrassment and afront to e the office he was appointed to serve. Language. Ry strong apparently you agreed with that concept because 90 of you voted to throw him out. Did he do . Cheated on his taxes. By making false statements under oath. About publish re. Ersus private senator mathias about this idea believe versus private. It my opinion the impeachment as judge ot as narrow claiborne suggests. Heres neither historical another logical reason to believe the framers sought to rohibit the house from impeaching an officer of the United States who completed reason or bribery oer high crime or misdemeanor which is a serious offense against the government and indicates that is unfit to exercise public responsibility which is is an offense technically unrelated to the fficers particular job responsibility. That hits it head on. Impeachable conduct doesnt have to occur in the course of the duty. Rs official evidence of misconduct, misbehavior can be justified withins private withins private deals and Public Office that of course is the situation in this case. Chart. To conclude asurd judge who committed murder, in his rape or espionage private life could not be removed from office by the u. S. Senate. The point you made so well was we are not buying this. Judge and a federal you cheat on your taxes and lie it r oath, it is true that had nothing to do with your courtroom. In a technical sense. But you are going to be judging they are going to come before you with their fate and we dont want somebody like you running our courtroom. Because people wont trust the results. Lets go to judge nixon. So we can have some lunch here. Judge nixon. Judge walter nixon convicted and removed from office for what . Perjury before a grand jury. What was that about . Tried to fix a case for a partners son in state cou court. Prosecutor who was in state court and tried to fix the case. Investigated the matter, he lied about meeting with the prosecutor. He lied about doing anything related to trying to manipulate results. He was convicted and he was by the ut of office United States senate. I guess you could say what does do with being a federal judge, it was not in his court. Has everything to do with being a high public official ecause if he stays in office what signal are you sending anybody else that you send to anybody elses courtroom . The question becomes, if a judge can be thrown out of office for lying and trying a friends sons case, can the president of the united removed from office for trying to fix his case . Thats not a scholarly word, but happened. Hat he tried to fix his case. Upturned the judicial system side down every way but loose. He sent his friends to lie for him. Hreupimself. Any time any relevant question he lied and dug a hole and we are here today because of over the wont go facts again because you have been bombarded with the facts. Commit ou believe he perjury and obstructed justice is to fix his id case and you have records that see what you n to do with somebody like that. Hastings. Was convictedudge and removed from office by the senate. Tates but you know what is interesting about this case to me . Acquitted before he got here. He was accused of conspiring ith another person to take money to fix results in his own cou court. Testimony on his own behalf. The conspirator was convicted acquitted. You know what the United States senate and house said . We believe your conduct is out of bounds and we are not bound acquittal. The truth. Get to and we dont want federal judges that we have a strong suspicion room belief that are trying to fix cases in their courts. The point im trying to make you dont even have to be lose ted of a crime to your job in this constitutional if this body determines as a public duct official is clearly out of bounds in your role. You did that. Because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing. He Office Impeachment is about restoring integrity to the office. Remedy of prosecuting women jefferson William Clinton has no effect on what you are facing today in my opinion. Every case was tried before t got here with different results. Two were convicted and one was acquitted. You had a factual record to go upon. Ladies and gentlemen of the United States senate, that that cannot happen in this we have a trial in its true sense of the word. And vidence is compelling overwhelming. But it has only been half told. The learned counsel for the president will have their chance lawyers. Are havent if this is a Football Game we almost to halftime. Plea wait, because i have sat where they have sat dying to Say Something. I know there are things they want to tell you about what we a d that may put this in different light and that is coming and ought to come. But theres another thing that have to decide. Has the factual record been that i can ough cquit with good conscience or convict and remove with good conscience. There was age cases full blown trial before it got here. Ecause we cant prosecute the president criminally and cant do what happened it the judges that record t have so i would commit that to you for your wisdom. None of this matters unless you committed the offense and i wont go over that again. You know the facts pretty well there is any doubt call witnesses and let them develop table and o doubt on make sure history will uphill it well and everybody the house and a fair shot at proving their case that these hings occurred, they are lie crimes and they are high es and hard question because when you look at the totality of with he did and the he was told by Supreme Court to go into this litigation and he cheated so badly that you consider these not to be not crimes because you are placing a burden this office cant bear. E resolved i will b hope and pray in a bipartisan fashion. Lets say this conduct is unacceptable by any president. Go to re high crimes and the core of why we are here as a he on, the rule of law and was told to abide by the rules of litigation and he cheated and him back in ut bounds. Remove him. High ining that it is a crime puts it back in bounds. Question. Hard i am not going to tell you it is not. Want to be where you are sitting. Evidence will e be persuasive that hes guilty. Of your past rulings and fundamental fairness and helping the Supreme Court enforce their rulings if othing else will lead to you a high crimes determination. But we are asking you to remove president. Dont know why all of this a popular d we have president. I know this. Are the American People fundamentally fair and they have an ar impression about impression about this case from ust tons and tons and tons of ta talk. Spin. And tons of and that one in five they tell me are paying close attention to this. Question you must ask, every is required to do what i have done is sit silently, evidence, would it be different . Representatives. They will trust you. Cynical age but im an optimist that no matter what you get up anduntry will go to work the next day and they matter what itno is. Aside an hrebelection is a very scary thought in a democracy. I do not agree with this president on most major policy initiatives. Did not vote for this president. But he won. He won twice. Undo that election is tough. Let me give you some of my thoughts. How many times have you had to a child, a grandchild, works for you, and give them a lecture that goes lines, dont do as i do, do as i say. Int that a miserable experience . This oblem with keeping president in office, in my pinion, is that these crimes anybody who red by looks at the evidence. They can be explained away and they can be excused. But they have farreaching farreaching consequences for the law. Role of chief Law Enforcement officer of the land. Say to our fellow will not be this as i do, dont as i say. , do what effect will that have . Devastating. Ll be this case is the butt of a jockes. D his case is requiring parents and teachers to sit down and about. What lying is all this case is creating confusion. Hit america far harder than any other. It is it it is tempting tick. The clock i would suggest to you that if percentage he is injurier. He obstructed in a civil rights not it, the question is stay, whethat if he stays. If you believe this president committed perjury before a grand begged not to and people telling him dont do it your political career is at stake, if you believe he obstruct a civil d justice in rights lawsuit dont move the bar any more. For this ved the bar case a thousand times. You felt when you a w you had a perjurer as judge, when you knew you had ly ebody who had fundamental ly that he was hrlaw responsible for upholding. When you ow you felt knew that judge got so out of bounds that you couldnt put him it was court even though unrelated to his court because you would be doing a disservice citizens that would come before him. Take care a duty to of the individuals fairly that come before their court. Ladies and t, gentlemen of the senate, has the duty to see that the law applies everyone fairly. Higher duty a higher duty in the constitution. Live with yourself leaveg that were going to bench. Uring judge on the ladies and gentlemen, as hard as the same reasons, cleanse this office. He Vice President will be waiting outside the doors of this chamber. Our constitutional system is at le and it is genius all the same time. If that Vice President is asked the mantleand assume of chief executive officer of the land, chief Law Enforcement the land, it will be tou painful, but l be we will survive and we will be better for it. You. K the chair recognizes mr. Counsel bumpers to continue president. R the mr. Chief justice, or house managers from the house of , i esentatives, colleagues look of the disappointment on many faces people thought you were rid of me once and for all. Have taken a lot of ribbing this afternoon, but i with eriously negotiated some people particularly on this by an offer to walk out and not deliver there speech in for a few votes. I understand three have it under active consideration. It is a great joy to see you and pleasant to see appear audience which represents the size of the cumulative audience i had over a period of years. Mr. Bumpers i came here today for a lot of reasons. One was that i was promised a 40 foot cord. Ive been shorted 28 feet. Chris dobbs said he didnt want me in his lap. And i assumed he arranged for the cord to be short. I want to especially thank some of you for your kind comments in the press. I received some publicity that i would be here to close the debate on behalf of the white house counsel. And the president. I was a little dismayed by senator bennetts remarks. He said, yes, senator bumpers is a great speaker. But he was never persuasive with me, because i never agreed with him. I thought he could have done better than that. You can take some comfort in the fact im not being paid. When im finished, you will probably think the white house got their moneys worth. I have told audiences that over 24 years that i went home almost every weekend and returned usually about dusk on sunday evening and you know the plane ride at international airport. When you can see the magnificent Washington Monument and this building. I told these students at the university in a small liberal arts school at home, after 24 years of that, hundreds of times ive never failed to get goosebumps. Same thing is true about this chamber. I can still remember as though it was yesterday the awe i felt when i first stepped into this magnificent chamber so full of history. So beautiful. And last tuesday, as i returned, after only a short threeweek absence, i still felt that same sense of awe that i did the first time i walked in this chamber. Colleagues, i come here with some sense of reluctance. The president and i have been Close Friends for 25 years. We fought so many battles back home together in our beloved arkansas. We tried mightily all of my years as governor and his and all of my years in the senate when he was governor to raise the Living Standards and the delta area of mississippi, arkansas, and louisiana where poverty is unspeakable with some measure of success. Not nearly enough. We tried to provide health care for the lesser among us. For those who are well off enough they cannot get on welfare but not making enough to buy health insurance. We have fought above Everything Else to improve the educational standards for a state that for so many years was at the bottomup the list or near the bottom of the list the bottom of the list or near the bottom of the list of income. We have stood sidebyside to save areas in our state from environmental degradation. We even crashed a twin engine beech bonanza trying to get to the Gillette Coon supper. A political event that one misses at his own risk. And we crashed this plane on a snowy evening in a rural airport off the runway sailing out across the snow. Jumped out. Jumped out and ran away unscathed to the dismay of everybody in arkansas. [laughter] the president and i have been together hundreds of times. At parades, dedications, political events, social events, and in all of those years and all those hundreds of times we have been together, both in public and in private, i have never one time seen the president conduct himself in a way that did not reflect the highest credit on him, his family, his state, and his beloved nation. The reason i came here today with some reluctance, please dont misconstrue that, it has nothing to do with my feelings about the president as i have already said. But it is because we are from the same state and we are friends. I know that diminishes the effectiveness of my words. So, if bill clinton, the man, bill clinton, the friend, were the issue here, im quite sure i would not be doing this. But it is the weight of history on all of us, and it is my reverence for that great document u. S. Heard me rail about for 24 years that we call our constitution. The most sacred document next to the holy bible. These proceedings go right to the heart of our constitution where it deals with impeachment. The part that provides the greatest punishment for just about anybody, the president. Even though the framers said we are putting this in to protect the public, not to punish the president. Colleagues, you have such an awesome responsibility. My good friend, the senior senator from new york, has said it well. He says, a decision to convict holds the potential for destabilizing the office of president. And those 400 historians, and i some have made light of that, are they just friends of bill . Last evening, i went over that list of historians, many of whom i know, among them woodward. In the south, we love him. He is the preeminent southern historian in the nation. I promise you, he may be a democrat. He may be even a friend of the president s. When you talk about integrity, he is the walking personification, example of occasion exemplification of integrity. Colleagues, i have heard so many adjectives to describe this gathering and these proceedings. Historic. Memorable. Unprecedented. Awesome. All of those words, all of those descriptions, are apt. And to those, i would add the word dangerous. Dangerous not only for the reasons i just stated but because it is dangerous to the political process. And its dangerous to the unique mix of pure democracy and republican government. Madison and his colleagues so brilliantly crafted. And which has sustained us for 210 years. Mr. Chief justice, this is what we lawyers call this cost you nothing, this is extra. But the more i study that document, those four months in philadelphia in 1787, the more awed i am. You know what madison did . He simply said, mans nature is to get other people to dance to their tune. Mans nature is to abuse his fellowman sometimes. And he said, the way to make sure that the majorities dont abuse the minorities, and the way to make sure the bullies do not run over the weaklings is to provide the same rights for everybody. And i had to think about that a long time, before i delivered my first lecture at the university of arkansas last week. It made so much sense to me. But the danger as i say is to the political process. And dangerous for reasons spirit by the framers about legislative control of the executive. That single issue and how to deal with impeachment was debated for the entire four months of the constitutional convention. But the word dangerous is not mine. It is Alexander Hamiltons. Brilliant, goodlooking guy. He quoted extensively on tuesday afternoon in his brilliant statement here. He quoted Alexander Hamilton precisely. It isnt easy to understand. If i may at the expense of being repetitious, let me paraphrase what hamilton said. He said, the senate had a unique role in participating with the executive branch in appointments. And two, it had a role, it had a role in participating with the executive in the character of a court for the trial of impeachments. But he said, and i must say this, and you all know it, he said, it would be difficult to get what he called a well constituted court from wholly elected members. He said passions would agitate the whole community. And divide it. Between those who were friendly and those who had a knuckle interest to the accused, animicables interest to namely the present. He said in these are his words, the greatest danger is that the decision would be based on the comparative strength of the parties rather than the innocence or guilt of the president. You have a solemn oath. You have taken a solemn oath to be fair and impartial. I know you all. I know you as friends. I know you as honorable men. I am perfectly satisfied to put that in your hands, under your oath. This is the only caustic say i will say in these remarks this afternoon. The question is, how did we come to be here . We are here because of a five year relentless unending investigation of the president. 50 billion. Hundreds of fbi agents fanning across the nation examining in detail the microscopic lives of people. Maybe the most intense investigation not only of a president but of anybody ever. I feel strongly about this because of my state. And what we have endured. So, youll have to excuse me. But that investigation has also shown that the judicial system in this country can and does get out of kilter unless it is controlled. Because there are innocent people, innocent people who have been financially and mentally bankrupted. One woman told me two years ago that her legal fees were 95,000. She said, the only asset i have is the equity in my home, which just happens to correspond to my legal fees of 95,000. She says the only thing i can think of to do is to deed my home. This woman was innocent, never charged, testified before the grand jury a number of times. Since that time, she has accumulated an additional 200,000 in attorney fees. Javerts pursuit of jean valjean pales by comparison. I doubt there are few people, maybe nobody in this body who could withstand such scrutiny. And in this case, those summoned were terrified not because of their guilt, but because they felt guilt or innocence was not really relevant. But after all of those years, and 50 million, of whitewater, travelgate, you name it, nothing. Nothing. The president was found guilty of nothing. Official or personal. Were here today because the president suffered a terrible moral lapse. A marital infidelity. Not a breach of the public trust. Not a crime against society. The two things hamilton talked about in federalist paper number 65. I recommend it to you before you vote. It was a breach of his marriage vows. It was a breach of his family trust. It is a sex scandal. H. L. Menken said, when you hear somebody say this is not about money, it is about money. [laughter] when you hear somebody say this is not about sex, it is about sex. You pick your own adjective to describe the president s conduct. Heres some that i would use. Indefensible. Outrageous. Unforgivable. Shameless. I promise you the president would not contest any of those or any others. But theres a Human Element in this case that has not even been mentioned. That is the president and hillary and chelsea are human beings. This is intended only as a mild criticism of our distinguished friends in the house. But, as i listened to the presenters to the managers make their opening statements, they were well prepared and they spoke eloquently, more eloquently than i really had hoped. But when i talk about the Human Elements, i talk about what i thought was on occasion unnecessarily harsh and pejorative discussions of the president. I thought the language should have been tempered somewhat to acknowledge that he is the president. To say constantly the president lied about this and lied about that, as i say, i thought that was too much for a family that has already been about is decimated as a family can get. The relationship between husband and wife, father and child, has been incredibly strained if not destroyed. Theres been nothing but sleepless nights, mental agony for this family for almost five years. Day after day. From accusations of having assassinated or had vince foster assassinated on down. It has been bizarre. But i didnt sense any compassion. And perhaps none is deserved. The president has said for all to hear that he misled, he deceived, he did not want to be helpful to the prosecution. And he did all of those things to his family, to his friends, to his staff, to his cabinet, and to the American People. Why would he do that . Well, he knew this whole affair was about to bring unspeakable embarrassment and humiliation on himself, his wife whom he adored, and a child that he worshiped with every fiber in his body. And for whom he would happily have died to spare her this or to ameliorate her shame and her grief. The house managers have said, shame and embarrassment is no excuse for lying. Well, the question about lying. Thats your decision. But i can tell you, you put yourself in his position, youve already had a big moral lapse, as to what you would do. We are none of us perfect. You say, he shouldve thought of all of that beforehand and indeed he should. Just as adam and eve should have. Just as you and you and millions of other people who have been caught in similar circumstances should have thought about it before. As i say, none of us are perfect. I remember, chaplain the chaplains not here, is he . Too bad. He ought to hear this story. This of angelas withholding holdingevangelist was this great revival meeting. At the close of his meeting, he said is there anybody in this audience who has known anyone close to the perfection of our lord and savior jesus christ . Nothing. He repeated the challenge. A guy in the back of the audience. You . Are you saying so . Stand up. He said, share with us. Who was it . He said, my wifes first husband. [laughter] mr. Bumpers make no mistake about it, removal from office is punishment. It is unbelievable punishment, even though the framers didnt quite see it that way. And where did high crimes and misdemeanors come from . It came from the english law. And they found it in english law under a category which said distinctly political offenses. Against the state. Let me repeat that. They said high crimes and misdemeanors they took it from english law. They found in a category that said offenses distinguished political against the state. So, colleagues, please for just one moment, forget the complexity of the facts and the tortured legalisms and weve heard them all brilliantly presented on both sides. Im not getting into that. But ponder this. If high crimes and misdemeanors was taken from english law by george mason, which listed high crimes and misdemeanors as political offenses against the state, what are we doing here . If as hamilton said, it had to be a crime against society or a breach of the public trust, what are we doing here . Even perjury. Concealing. Or deceiving. An unfaithful relationship does not even come close to being an impeachable offense. Nobody has suggested that bill clinton committed a political crime against the state. So, colleagues, if you honor the constitution, you must look at the history of the constitution and how we got to the impeachment clause . If you do that honestly, according to the oath you took, you cannot, you can censor bill clinton, you can hand him over to the prosecutor to be prosecuted, but you cannot convict him. And you cannot indulge yourselves the luxury or the right to ignore this history. Theres been a suggestion that a vote to acquit would be something of a breach of faith with those who lie in flanders field. On bunker hill and gettysburg and wherever. I didnt hear that. I read about it. But i want to say, and incidentally, i think it was chairman hyde who alluded to this and said, those men fought and died for the rule of law. I can remember a cold november 3 morning in my hometown of charleston, arkansas. I was 18 years old. Just gotten one semester in at the university when i went into the marine corps. And so, i was to report to little rock to be inducted. It was cold. The drug store was the bus stop. I had to be there by 8 00 to be sworn in. And i had to catch the bus at the drugstore at 3 a. M. So my mother and father and i got up at 2 00 and got dressed and went down there. Im not sure i can tell you this story. The bus came over the hill, and i was frightened about going. I was sure i was going to be killed. Slightly less frightened that betty would find somebody else when i was gone. The bus came over schoolhouse hill. I had never seen my father cry. I knew i was in some difficulty. As a parent, at my age, i know nothought he was giving only his only begotten son, but begotten sons. Can you imagine . You know that scene. It was repeated across our nation millions of times. Survived happily, i that war, saw no combat, was on my way to japan, when it all ended. Problemhad a terrible dropping the bomb, though that has been a terrible moral dilemma for me, because the estimates were we would lose as many as a million men in that invasion. I came home to a generous government who provided me, under the g. I. Bill, and education at a fairly Prestigious Law School which my father never could have afforded. And i practiced law in this little town for 18 years, loved every minute of it. But i didnt practice constitutional law and i knew very little about the constitution, but when i went i didnt study, constitutional law, but mr. Chief justice, it was fairly arcane to me. And trying to read the federalist papers, de tocqueville, all those things law students are supposed to do, it was tough for me, i confess. After 18 years in law practice, i jumped up and ran for governor and i served as governor for four years, and i still i guess i knew what the rule of law was, but i still did not have much reverence for the constitution. I did not understand any of the things i just got through telling you. No, my love that document came the day after day and debate after debate right here in this chamber. Ane of you perhaps read oped piece i did a couple weeks ago where i said i was perfectly as a tweety legacy fouryour senator to be i never voted for a constitutional amendment. Its not that i wouldnt. I think they made a mistake in not giving you fellas for years. 4 years. You are about to cause me to rethink that one. [laughter] rs and the reason i this love of it, i sought madisons magic running time and time again, keeping bullies from running over weak people, keeping bullies from keeping majorities from running over minorities. I thought about the freedoms we had, the oldest organic law in existence, made us the envy of the world. Mr. Chairman, we also learned the rule of president ial elections. Thats part of the rule of law in this country. Events, a quadrennial we have an event, a quadrennial event in this country, which we call president ial elections. Across then we reach aisle and hold hands, democrats and republicans, and we say, win , we will abide by the decision. It is a solemn event, president ial elections, and they should not be undone lightly. Or just because one side has the clout and the other doesnt. And if you want to know what men fought for in world war ii, in vietnam, ask senator in no way inouye. Or we started off in anzio senator, were you with us . The most awesome experiences i ever had in my life. Certified war hero. Anhink his relatives were at internment camp, so ask him, what was he fighting for . Kerrey. Ob certified medal of honor winner. What was he fighting for . You probably would get a quite different answer. Or the certified hero of erotica now guadacanal. Ask him. And senator mccain. Ask him. Youll have to guess. They are with us and they are living and they can tell you. And one who is not with us in the senate anymore, robert dole. Ask senator dole what he was fighting for. Senator dole had, what i thought, was a very reasonable solution to this whole thing that would handle it fairly and expeditiously. The American People are now, and sometime, have been asking to be allowed a good night sleep. For an end tog this nightmare. It is a legitimate request. I am not suggesting that you the polls. Against no one should vote for or against the polls just to show their courage. I have cast plenty of votes against the polls and it has cost me sometimes. This has been going on for a year though. In that same op ed, i talked about meeting harry truman my first year as governor of arkansas. I spent an hour with him. People at home kid me about this because i very seldom make a speech where i do not mention this meeting, but i will never forget what he said. Put your faith in the people. Trust the people. They can handle it. They have shown conclusively time and time again that they can handle it. Colleagues, this is easily the most important vote you will ever cast. If you had difficulty because of an intense dislike of the president , thats understandable. Rise above it. He is not the issue. Gone. L be but you wont. So dont leave a president from from whichprecedent we may never recover and almost surely will regret. Acquit, mr. To leader, you know exactly what is going to happen. You are going to go back to your committees, you will get on the legislative agenda, you will deal with medicare and Social Security and tax cuts, all of these things that the people of this country have a nonnegotiable demand that you do. If you vote to acquit, you go immediately to the peoples agenda. But if you vote to convict, you can be sure whats can happen. G. Blame was a member of the senate when Andrew Johnson was tried and 28 years later he recanted. E said i made a bad mistake and he says, as i reflect back on it, all i can think about is having convicted Andrew Johnson would have caused much more country than ever could have tried. And so it is with William Jefferson clinton. Convict, in my opinion, you will be creating more havoc than he could possibly create. After all, hes only got two years left. The dont, for god sakes heighten peoples alienation, that is at an alltime high, toward their government. The people have a right and they are calling on you to rise above politics, rise above. Artisanship they are calling on you to do your solemn duty and i pray you will. Thank you, mr. Chief justice. Chair reminds the senate that each senator when his or her name is called will stand in his or her place and vote guilty by theguilty as required articles of impeachment. The chair also refers to article one, section three, requiring novote on impeachment person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present. The question is on the first article of impeachment. Senators, how say you . Is the respondent, William Jefferson clinton guilty or not guilty. All rollcall vote is required. The clerk will call the vote. Mr. Abraham . Guilty. Mr. Abraham, guilty. Mr. O caught up. This article of impeachment, 45 senators having pronounced William Jefferson clinton guilty as charged, 55 senators having pronounced him not guilty. Two thirds of the senators present not having pronounced jefferson, William Clinton is not guilty as charged in the first article of impeachment. Is on the second article of impeachment. Senators, how say you question mark is the respondent, William Jefferson clinton, guilty or not guilty . The clerk will call the roll. Mr. Abraham . Mr. Abraham, guilty. On this article of impeachment, 50 senators have pronounced William Jefferson clinton, president of the United States, guilty as charged. 50 senators have not roused him guilty. Two thirds of the senate not having pronounced him guilty, the Senate Judges that the responding, William Jefferson clinton, president of the United States, is not guilty as charged in the second article of impeachment. Judgment asrect the follows the senate having tried William Jefferson clinton, president of the United States upon two articles of impeachment issued by the house of representatives, and two thirds of the senate not having done him guilty of the charges therein, it is therefore ordered that William Jefferson clinton is hereby acquitted of the charges in the said articles. The chair recognizes the majority leader. Mr. Chief justice, there is an order at the desk. Thef Justice Rehnquist clerk will read the order. Ordered that the secretary be communicate to the secretary of state as required by the rules of procedure and practice in the senate when trials,on impeachment and also to the house of representatives, the judgment of the senate, in the case of William Jefferson clinton, and transmit a Certified Copy of the judgment to each. Chief Justice Rehnquist without objection, the order will be entered. The chair which is to make a brief statement without objection, i trust . [laughter] chief a month ago Justice Rehnquist more than a month ago, i came to preside. I was a stranger to the great majority of you. I underwent the Culture Shock that naturally occurs when one one moves when one moves from the very structured and armor of the Supreme Court to four ck of a 8 for la better word, the more freeform environment of the senate. Aneave you and impressed impressed man. I have been impressed by the quality of debate in closed sessions on the entire question of impeachment as provided for in the constitution, agreed upon procedures must be the hallmark of any great deliberative body. Our work at the court of impeachment is now done. Hope thatu with the our paths may cross again under happier circumstances. The majority leader. Mr. Chief justice, i thank you for your comments and i send the resolution to the desk. Chief Justice Rehnquist the clerk will read the resolution. Resolution 37, to express gratitude for service of the chief justice of the United States as presiding officer during the impeachment trial. Lott mr. Chief justice, i ask that it be considered having been read in its entirety . Rehnquist the clerk will read it in its entirety. Senator lott and i would ask introduced earlier today by senator lott and senator daschle that the resolution be adopted. Chief Justice Rehnquist without objection, the resolution is adopted. Senator lott i ask that any statement senators wish to make at this point be printed in the record. Chief Justice Rehnquist without objection, it is so ordered. Senator lott on behalf of myself and the entire senator we want to offer our thanks and the gratitude of the American People for your service to the nation throughout this Impeachment Court to this institution as our presiding officer during most of it the last five weeks, your project proceedings a gentle dignity and an unfailing sense of purpose and sometimes sense of humor. The majority leader realized when it was time to take a break and not to take a break when the chief justice said lets go forward. By lacing duty above personal convenience and many other considerations, you have taught a lesson in leadership. It gave comedy to this comity to this chamber. I would like to leave you with but i come back soon, hope that is not taken the wrong way and on occasion like this one. We salute you, sir, with renewed appreciation and esteem for a good friend and good neighbor. And now, mr. Chief justice, if the democratic leader would join you, we have a small token of our appreciation. We have a tradition in the senate that after you have presided over the senate for 100 hours we present you with the golden gavel award, and im not sure it quite reached 100 hours, but its close enough. [laughter] [applause] some of the highlights of the senate trial of president bill clinton in early february 1999. As you look back at those moments, what stands out . By the time the vote was actually taken at the end of the monthlong trial, it seemed to have lost the suspense about where it was going to go because the hurdles in the constitution are pretty high. Two thirds of those present would need to vote on the articles of impeachment to remove a president from office. By the time we had watched a lot of this debate, the discussion of the articles and the vote, the result a lot of anticipation that there were republicans ready to cross over and acquit the president. There was agitation, there were whole numbers showing that the impeachment was dragging on so long there were Senate Republicans who wanted to get this over with. Even if the house managers were determined. It there was a sense that was not necessarily much suspense, right . It was sort of a foregone conclusion the president was going to be acquitted. By the time we got to the end, the question was what were the numbers going to be as opposed to what was the outcome going to be . If youre going to ask me next steve what the votes were . Steve that is my next question. For perjury, 45 voted guilty, the president guilty, 55 not guilty. That did not even come close to the 67 you would need to remove the present. Obstruction of justice, the boat the vote was 5050. You might consider that close, but it was not close to 67, so that was not successful either. There were four republicans at the end that went and forth, but they voted for acquittal. So, the president attracted some moderate republicans to acquit, and so the numbers actually gave the president the vindication, in some ways, he was looking for. Steve and then two years later, in the senate, Hillary Clinton of new york would join the senators who basically have the fate of the Clinton Presidency in their hands. She was elected in 2000. Ms. Simendinger she was not only elected. There was a lot of drama that went into her senate race know, she was all going to succeed in a state where she represented and had not lived them she got Daniel Patrick moynihan to endorse her. He was not super fond of the clintons. He endorsed her. I remember covering her at the start of her Senate Campaign steve at the farm . Ms. Simendinger at the farm. This beautiful outdoor kind of cabin thing on his property where he wrote a book every summer and did research and it was just idyllic, beautiful. Nd there was Hillary Clinton and he gave multiple endorsement and helped her to win in the state and when she arrived in became veryshe popular among her colleagues because she was known as a workhorse, not a show horse. She really tried to dig down and do the work of a senator and she enjoyed it. She definitely enjoyed it, and she had good relations with her colleagues, and worked across the aisle, oxley, very effectively. Misgivings about those in the senate who wanted to prosecute the president and find him guilty, she did not show it. She moved on. Steve how did president clinton respond after the senate vote . Ms. Simendinger after the senate vote he came out and gave a speech. We forget that right after the vote, the president was acquitted, there was an effort to censure him. There was a motion to censure him. That also would need 67 votes. That failed as well. The president understood that was going to happen. He came forward in the rose garden actually and he spoke by himself. He did not come out with a flotilla of democrats. There was no cheering section. He bit his lip a lot and he brieflybout how very he spoke about how he wanted the forgiveness of the American People. He said he was very sorry for what he put the country through. President clinton i want to say again to the American People how profoundly sorry i am for what i said and did. Events andf these the great burden they have imposed on congress and the American People. I also am humbled and very grateful for the support and prayers i have received from millions of americans over this past year. He talkedinger and about repairing the breach. He said he wanted to see the American People come together, that he wanted to forge some sort of unity or alliance, to try to work across the aisle, and he promised the American People again he would work until the last minute, the last hour of the last day and he would serve honorably, and he went back, started to go back into the oval office. , someone barked out can he forgive . And he decided to take that question and he came back to the microphone. President clinton i believe any person who asks for forgiveness has to be prepared to give it. He walked back with his head down into the oval office and continue to govern. Two finalthe final points to put this in perspective. In the me too generation we look back at bill clinton with a different prism, do we not . Ms. Simendinger oh, yes. We have seen that come up again and again. One of the things we look back on, and Hillary Clinton played an Important Role in getting her husband towards acquittal in that she was very angry they did not speak for a long time after she learned about the Monica Lewinsky relationship, but she did step forward to tell senate democrats, House Democrats at a key moment that she loved her husband, that schieffer gave him, that she felt he was a good president and he should continue to be president , and of course, they stayed married. She played an Important Role. They talked about how important it was an painful it was to see the shock and the sorrow she had gone through and she stepped forward to try to defend her husband. That may have been very important for the American People to see that she did defend him. Today, we look back on this and we see this string of cases that have been put forward against present clinton from women president clinton who have accused him of everything from Sexual Harassment to rape. We have a whole movement of women and women voters who are entirely intolerant of that behavior. We have seen the house adopt rules about how the offices have to handle Sexual Harassment complaints. We have seen lawmakers resign more recently because of allegations they have harassed subordinates. Have a less Tolerant Society for that. Republican and democratic lawmakers, women, are trying to encourage more women to run for office and join the house and the senate, and how important they feel that it is and how important they feel that their influence on the legislative branch has been in taking Sexual Harassment seriously. Steve thank you for putting all of this into perspective and than 20 years ago. My final question is this. The politics of impeachment. What are the lessons . Ms. Simendinger well, one of the things that has kind of taken me aback we talk about the politics of personal destruction back in 1980 1998 ,n 1999 and hyper partisanship the politics of personal discretion have only gotten worse. When president clinton was acquitted, he tried to encourage the idea that this should in, even though he, himself, had been one of the purveyors of the techniques of personal destruction. We are seeing politics now that hyper divided, an electorate that is so divided, the idea that folks can get there information work there information wherever they want, cater to information that supports their point of view or their support for politicians, and i think that this is one of has worriedhat political scholars and political scientists, as well as lawmakers. It only took us two decades to get to impeachment again. The concern is we will see impeachment used as a political weapon again much sooner than it to 1998. 1868 to 1974 as always, we appreciate your time. Ms. Simendinger thank you very much. Is American History tv, covering history cspan style with lectures, interviews, and discussions. 48 hours all weekend, every weekend, only on cspan3. Madame c. J. Walker was thought to be the wealthiest African American woman of her time. We visit the madame c. J. Walker, empowering women exhibit to learn about her impact in the early 20th century. Madame walker was mainly known for being an entrepreneur, having her own hair care line and cosmetics company, and being a millionaire. She was born in 1867 in delta, louisiana. That is two years post emancipation