The Argumentative Essay: The Impeachment Of Bill Clinton

528 Words3 Pages
Impeachment is a very precisely defined term in the constitution that is very vaguely backed up. Although it is clear what the levy of impeachment imposes, the standards in which one can be charged against are not very clear. This is why the 1998 Clinton impeachment trial was one of the most controversial trials in our nation’s history. The House of Representatives voted faintly in favor of a trial of the impeachment of our 42nd president, Bill Clinton. Clinton was accused on multiple charged, perjury and the obstruction of administrative justice. Upon these charges, I believe Bill Clinton should have been impeached. Expert witnesses- professors Mark Nelson and Sarah Bradley both portrayed very persuasive arguments; however, upon viewing the…show more content…
The oath of office requires that they must abide by the constitution, carry out laws, and uphold honesty, virtue, and honor. When one is implementing this, they are being sworn in. Bradley stated that no person shall choose when to keep the truth under oath. This statement keeps the charter for not only our idea of the frame of morality, but just simply ethics. Rather than successfully doing his job by executing laws and and abiding by the constitution, Clinton attempted to cheat his the courts and his trial. Upon Jones’ deposition, she claims that he would use his authority as a governor to recompense women who had sexual relations with him. I conjecture that although this was just a statement from her deposition, one who uses his power in office to reward women should be impeached.

The perspective of both professors greatly influenced by opinion on whether former president Bill Clinton should be impeached. Upon reviewing both arguments, a summary on facts of the impeachment process, and a summary of the case- Bill Clinton should have been impeached. Although controversial, this is strictly my opinion. One who swears himself to stand by the constitution and to take the position as Chief enforcing officer of the United States should surely be impeached upon being committed of acts of perjury and obstruction of administrative
Open Document