Talk:Bill Clinton

I am going to have to rewrite this article for obvious reasons.Geo. 00:37, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Too even-handed?McTavidge 22:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Well, I tend to think that the fact that the article claims that Clinton was impeached isn't greatly even-handed. I'm a conservative like any other person with reasonable political ideals, but I think we're sort of stretching credibility with this one. Karalius Nyder 22:31, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Sorry, my apologies - he was impeached! I need to brush up on my American politics. Karalius Nyder 00:45, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Article name

Ok, does this make sense to have as William Jefferson Clinton when he was known as Bill Clinton? I don't think that anyone seriously would move Julias Caesar to Gaius Julius Caesar or Plutarch to Mestrius Plutarchus and I don't see how these are substantially different. JoshuaZ 21:12, 5 March 2007 (EST)

White House website says: William J. Clinton

Columbia Encyclopedia says: Bill Clinton

Encarta says: Bill Clinton

Britannica says: Bill Clinton

American Heritage Dictionary says: Clinton, William Jefferson

Clinton Library is: William J. Clinton Presidential Library and Museum

Gale's Biography Research Center says:

Bill Clinton

(American president, 1946-)

Also known as: William Jefferson Clinton, William J. Clinton, William Clinton, William Jefferson Blythe

and includes

"Bill Clinton," in American Decades 1990-1999. Tandy McConnell, ed. Detroit: Gale Group, Inc., 2001.

"Bill Clinton," in Current Leaders of Nations. Gale Research, 1998.

"Bill Clinton," in Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed. 17 Vols. Gale Research, 1998.

"Bill Clinton," in Newsmakers. Cumulation issue. Gale Research, 1992. (A profile of the individual's personal life, career, and newsworthy achievements.)

"William Jefferson Clinton", in Contemporary Authors Online.

"Bill Clinton," in Worldmark Encyclopedia of the Nations, Volume 6: World Leaders, 10th ed. Gale Group, 2001.

I've moved the article to "Bill Clinton" and created redirects for all the other forms of the name.

Dpbsmith 21:20, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Impeached?

From everything I've learned, Bill Clinton didn't get impeached. He was on the verge of being impeached and resigned. Article needs to be fixed if thats the case.

I think you're thinking of Richard Nixon. Clinton _was_ impeached, but went on with running the country anyway. --BDobbs 23:55, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

• Impeachment is a term not for removal, but for a vote of trial. President Clinton was impeached, and put on trial. He was not convicted. President Clinton was convicted in another matter, of a Felony. He lost his law license because of that perjury conviction. President Nixon was threatened with Impeachment, but never was there a vote, or trial. --~ TK ^MyTalk 03:50, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

Bill Clinton was convicted of a felony? cite, please? He gave up his law license and paid a $25,000 fine to the Arkansas bar in exchange for no criminal charges being filed.. It's not exactly scot-free or exoneration, but it's also not a felony conviction. -- Jtl 03:59, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

• Yes, one step ahead, it seems. He essentially pleaded "Nolo Contendre", and for doing so, was spared the humilation of being convicted. Sorry for my inexcuseable error in mistating a conviction, when on a technicality, he really wasn't. [1]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a disciplinary action never before taken against a sitting U.S. president, an Arkansas Supreme Court panel has filed suit to strip Bill Clinton of his license to practice law

"The conduct of Mr. Clinton ... was motivated by a desire to protect himself from the embarrassment of his own conduct," the Arkansas State Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct declared in its five-page lawsuit, filed on Friday at about 3:45 p.m. (4:45 p.m. EDT) with the Pulaski County Circuit Court clerk in Little Rock.[2]

--~ TK ^MyTalk 04:11, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

As far as I can tell, he didn't plead nolo contendre either, because there weren't any charges filed. Your quote isn't about a plea; it isn't even about charges being filed. It's about a lawsuit being filed. Civil cases aren't criminal. Lawsuits being filed aren't lawsuits being decided. Agreements to avoid charges aren't convictions, or guilty pleas, or even nolo contendre pleas.

In your mind, was Rush Limbaugh convicted of a felony in the oxycontin case? He paid a fine and agreed to drug testing for some number of years in exchange for charges not being filed. --Jtl 04:15, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

• What a throughly mean spirited and nasty person you must be. Let it go. I admitted my mistake. What has happened to you in your life to make you this way? I don't condone anyone in the public eye getting treatment others wouldn't get. It is no matter if its Clinton or Limbaugh, and that should be obvious. That you thought I would condone Limbaugh's illegal activities, and not Clinton's speaks to your mind-set. --~ TK ^MyTalk 04:17, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

And that you would assume I thought knew the answer to my honest question speaks to yours. --Jtl 04:23, 14 April 2007 (EDT)