This is a question about the Bush and Clinton administrations?

Question

I asked this question earlier, but I didn't get any GOOD responses. So...Why was Clinton impeached and nearly removed from office, and how is that different from Bush. It seems to me that we can impeach one President for lying and keep another in office for the same thing. It's just that one lie cost a man his reputation and nearly his job and the other lie to date has cost the country 500 million dollars and over 3000 lives. I think that this contradiction is one of the reasons why our standing in the world has changed in the past 8 or 9 years. What are your thoughts? The answer that I got was that President Clinton was impeached for perjury not lying so please don't put that.

Answer 1

If your talking about "the Bush Lie" where he depended on the intelligence community to inform him of the status of Iraq and then went on to the WMD.... Well wake up. Clinton who cut funds for the intelligence at the CIA (under his administration) and the FBI (both under democratic ability to stop the cut of funding) told George Bush that Iraq had WMD and that there was proof he had used them in the past on his own people. Don't you get your facts right and the time line? Then the only way you could impeach GW Bush would be for taking information from Clinton who also thought WMD's were in Iraq's possession. Too bad you choose to believe that perjury is not impeachable. All Clinton had to do was tell the truth, the real truth under oath, not the supposed truth like with the WMD's. Its ok to believe something you believe to be true (Like Obama is the best thing since sliced bread)  its another thing to out n out say "Obama is the answer to class equalization" no ever will conquer ecconomic equalization. The haves will keep all they can and the have nots will keep stealing it legally from the middle class.

Answer 2

Sorry bro but you don't have an argument.  Clinton lied under oath.  Not saying I agree with it, because the question that was asked of him was baseless and ridiculous but he still did lie under oath which is I believe a felony at the federal level.  

Bush may or may not have lied.  I don't know, I don't have all the facts.  I only get the facts that the media distorts on Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, New York Times and Washington Post.  If Bush is subpoenaed while still in office to answer for the war in Iraq and it is proven that he lied, or he lies while under oath, than I say it's a free for all, and he should get his just reward.

Answer 3

Thats easy.

Clinton broke the law.

When he lied under oath, during a civil trial.

Bush hasn't broken any law.

No one has been able to show a single lie, that Bush told,

The Senate report on pre war intelligence, supported the president on WMD's, mobile labs, alum tubes and everything else the left says Bush lied about.

.........................................

But it comes down to, Clinton broke the law,

And Bush hasn't broken any law yet.

Answer 4

I believe it had more to do with a predominantly republican congress wanting to oust Bill Clinton.  They set up Kenneth Starr as a special investigator looking into the Whitewater scandal.  

He couldn't find much there.  Then, the Monica scandal happened.  This was the smoking gun they were looking for.

Currently, we don't have a congress that's 'out to get' Bush.

Answer 5

Clinton got to Bush..that is Monica's.

that's impeachable...