As House Democrats wrestle with the question of whether, or when, they ought to begin an impeachment inquiry against President Trump, many are looking to lessons from 1998, when House Republicans unsuccessfully sought to remove President Bill Clinton from office. But most analysis based on that era is distorted because it ignores a simple fact: Clinton should never have been impeached, because he should have resigned in shame as soon as news of his affair with Monica Lewinsky became public.
Clinton, then in his late 40s, had an affair with a White House intern in her early 20s. Specific details, which became public, are revolting. He then lied about it. He urged others to lie about it. That was wrong. Any human being with a functioning sense of shame would have left office immediately.
There should have been no gilded post-presidency for him, no Clinton Foundation, no multimillion-dollar book deals, no astronomical lecture fees. He should have returned to Arkansas and raised pigs to remind himself of his proper place in the universe. (Hillary Clinton, his wife and the future secretary of state, could obviously have chosen to move to New York and run for Senate, or followed him back to Arkansas, or done whatever else she liked.)
This is not some “woke” analysis rooted in the shifting workplace sexual mores of the #MeToo era. Bill Clinton’s actions were obviously wrong by the standard of that time and place. Sure, powerful men did worse and got away with it — but once his inappropriate actions became public, remaining in public life should have been untenable.
What would have been the result? A popular liberal talking point at the time held that Republicans were seeking to “overturn” the 1996 presidential election. That was always absurd. Clinton’s resignation would not have put former Sen. Bob Dole, or any other Republican, in the Oval Office. Vice President Al Gore, elected by voters, would have taken over the executive branch. Frankly, Gore would have stood a much better chance of wining the 2000 presidential election in his own right without the stain and shadow of Clinton looming over him.
Instead, Clinton chose to stay and fight. He pulled his political party and the broader cause of liberalism into a battle to defend his indefensible actions. Democrats, with the exception of a few censorious speeches, closed ranks behind him. Among those standing supportively with Clinton on the South Lawn of the White House following the House impeachment vote were current congressional leaders like Reps. Steny Hoyer, Jim Clyburn, and John Lewis.
[Also read: Schiff pushes ballot box given ‘no sign’ impeachment can remove Trump]
Men and women who had spent their lives working to advance the causes of civil rights and women’s rights contorted themselves to make specious arguments in Clinton’s service, publicly shredding decades’ worth of credibility, all to prevent Al Gore from becoming president.
Republicans and conservatives were justifiably appalled by liberals’ hypocrisy, and the cause of fighting workplace sexism and discrimination was arguably set back by a decade or more.
Were Democrats right that Republicans should not have tried to impeach Clinton for, in essence, lying about a consensual, though inappropriate, sexual relationship? Probably. It is hard to argue that his conduct rose to the constitutional standard of “high crimes or misdemeanors.” But congressional Republicans, I would argue, didn’t really want to impeach Clinton. They felt they were forced to, because Clinton refused to resign after dishonoring his office.
When it comes to impeachment, we tend to extrapolate widely from the handful of examples available, only two in the modern era. But the lesson that conventional wisdom draws from the Clinton impeachment — that impeaching, but not convicting, a president will only increase his popularity — is not necessarily supported by the available evidence.
That is the complicated legacy of the last impeachment battle. So, as they contemplate action against another president who seems to lack a functional sense of shame, I would urge Washington Democrats to reflect on the errors of the past, including their own.
Michael Steel (@Michael_Steel) served as press secretary for former House Speaker John Boehner from 2008 to 2015. He also served as press secretary for Paul Ryan during the 2012 presidential election.
