My posts re Clinton were because of the erroneous posting that the Clinton impeachment was about SEX- IT WAS ABOUT PERJURY. But having been informed by those here that ARE TO BE OBEYED, I guess I have to go back and alter history to match the "TRUTH"

BB, it was about perjury...and he was acquitted for it. That's that. No perjury. Largely because the stuff he was asked about was immaterial, because it was about sex in a real-estate investigation.

Also, you must be lying above, because your post about Bill Clinton was the first one on the thread. There was no eroneous posting stating that the Clinton impeachment was about Sex.

Once again, the case against Clinton by Paula Jones was thrown out of court. It is you who is living in a different world, DougR. Here is the beginning of the article linked to by Brian:

Paula Jones verdict: insufficient evidence

The judge's rigorous standards were not met

It was not a ruling that anyone expected.

More than four years after Paula Jones filed her sexual harassment suit against President Bill Clinton, the federal judge Susan Wright Webber dismissed the case, saying that it did not meet the legal standard for sexual harassment.

As for the impeachment votes, they were:

* SENATE ACQUITS CLINTON *
55-45 "NOT GUILTY" VOTE ON PERJURY; 50-50 ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
(http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/impeach.htm)

In other words, according to the Senate, he did NOT commit perjury, and according to the courts, he did NOT commit sexual harrasment.

But you continue to remember it your way, DougR and BB.