Get e-book Our Scandalous Senate (Point of View)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Our Scandalous Senate (Point of View) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Our Scandalous Senate (Point of View) book. Happy reading Our Scandalous Senate (Point of View) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Our Scandalous Senate (Point of View) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Our Scandalous Senate (Point of View) Pocket Guide.

I was now a private citizen and a volunteer to help the president. It was very difficult, physically and mentally. In August I had to go into the hospital because I had something called diverticulitis. He says he wants to talk about oral sex. Sally Quinn of The Washington Post published one in the fall of James Carville: I can easily tell you what the high point of that whole time was. The high point was the Sally Quinn piece in The Washington Post where every fool was mouthing off about how Washington was a village and how dare the Clintons intrude on their turf.

No one could stop laughing at that. David Broder—just priceless. Clinton remained popular with the public. After he denied an affair with Lewinsky in January, his Gallup approval rating spiked 10 points, to 69 percent. It remained in the 60s until the impeachment vote in December, when it shot up again, to 73 percent. Lanny Davis: Everybody in the country got it in about a week. Bad judgment. Whatever you want to say. Nothing to do with abuse of presidential power.

Nothing to do with the impeachment clause. He had publicly apologized to the country, to Ms. Lewinsky, and to his wife and family. It took all of Washington, including me, about a year to figure that out. On October 5, , the House Judiciary Committee voted to launch an impeachment inquiry, followed by the full House three days later.

Transcript: Patrick Boyer: Our Scandalous Senate | Mar 17, | uketerinucuz.tk

Gingrich predicted that the Republicans would add significantly to their majority. Instead, the Democrats gained five seats in the House. Although the Republicans retained the majority, Gingrich was weakened and planned to resign his seat. Bob Livingston, of Louisiana, was expected to be elected the next speaker. Bob Livingston: We should have, when Clinton got into trouble, just not focused on his problems in the media. James Rogan: Suddenly the Republicans realized all this talk about impeachment almost cost them the majority.

The speaker lost his job because of it. Barney Frank: It was always my view that Henry Hyde, the Judiciary chair, did not want to go ahead and press impeachment all the way, but Tom DeLay [the majority whip] was calling the shots and kept pushing them and pushing them. As the Judiciary Committee began its inquiry, the typically rule-obsessed House had little sense of how to proceed.

The Constitution lays out no specifics, and no president had been impeached since Andrew Johnson, in Members modeled the process on the Nixon investigation, a quarter century earlier. Charles Johnson was the House parliamentarian. Charles Johnson: The rules governing the actions of the Judiciary Committee almost entirely mirrored what had gone on in the Nixon investigation. We had gone back to the journals of the Johnson impeachment, which were written in quill pen. Of course, by the time articles of impeachment were ready to come to the floor, Nixon had resigned.

The White House presented as witnesses several veterans of the Watergate process as well as the Princeton history professor Sean Wilentz. Sean Wilentz: I wanted to be as direct as possible about what the stakes were. There were still some House Republicans not on the committee who were on the fence, and I wanted to make it clear to them that impeachment was a terrible thing as far as the Constitution was concerned, that voting for impeachment for partisan or self-interested reasons was what the Framers had feared.

I wanted to find some way to say that. History tracked me down. When I adapted the phrase in front of the Judiciary Committee, I could see off in the corner that the Republican staffers were really very riled. The Democrats sought to strike a deal to censure Clinton instead of impeaching him. It was ruled out of order. On December 11, the Judiciary Committee voted essentially along party lines to send three articles of impeachment to the full House, and added a fourth the following day.

The first article alleged that Clinton had committed perjury by lying to the grand jury in August about his relationship with Lewinsky, and in prior false statements. The second alleged that he had also perjured himself in his January deposition in the Jones case. The third accused him of obstructing justice—coaching Lewinsky and Betty Currie on their stories, concealing gifts he had received from Lewinsky, and attempting to find her a job.

The fourth alleged that he had abused his office by attempting to stonewall the impeachment inquiry. Hearings in the full House were scheduled for December 17, but were delayed for a day when Clinton launched air strikes against Iraq—prompting renewed outrage and Wag the Dog analogies. She, too, had been called to testify before the grand jury. Self returned to Harvard to finish her degree but arranged to visit Currie on December 18, on her way home to Alabama for Christmas—the day before the impeachment vote, when televised debate was in full swing.

I saw the president. He said hello, and then he asked Betty to turn up the volume on the TV. Then we watched the impeachment debate on the TV. Talk about surreal. I wonder what he was really feeling. Outwardly, Washington laughed. Privately, some members were nervous. Gingrich, while married, was conducting an affair with his now-wife, Callista.

Several representatives confessed to earlier extramarital affairs, including Henry Hyde, Helen Chenoweth, and Dan Burton, who had become infamous for shooting at melons in his yard in a bid to prove that Vince Foster had been murdered. Around midnight on December 15, a staffer called House Speaker-designate Bob Livingston and said Flynt had turned up affairs of his from years earlier.


  1. You might also like;
  2. Join Kobo & start eReading today.
  3. Our Scandalous Senate?
  4. China as a Sea Power, 1127-1368 : A Preliminary Survey of the Maritime Expansion and Naval Exploits of the Chinese People During the Southern Song and Yuan Periods.
  5. Immoral or Scandalous.
  6. La donna in bianco. Libro sesto (Italian Edition)!
  7. Gli artigli dellangelo (Italian Edition)?

On December 19, Livingston told a shocked House that he would not stand for speaker and planned to resign. Representative Ray LaHood was presiding over the impeachment hearing. Flynt was sitting there holding all the cards. To sweep it under the rug would have meant a total catastrophe on the opening day of Congress. It was raucous when I called on Clinton to resign, told him that it would be painful but that other people had done exactly what he had done and had gone to prison for it.

And then I just put my hand up and carried through with my own resignation. There was a pall. There was a lot of quiet.

What is Kobo Super Points?

Ray L a Hood : The air went out of the chamber. We are going ahead with this. Charles Johnson: Ray LaHood was in the chair, and members, really responsible members on the Democratic side—Vic Fazio, I remember, and Mel Watt, two or three others—came up and urged LaHood to run as a caretaker speaker.

Hastert emerged from nowhere. Larry Flynt: It was hypocrisy up to his eyeballs. James Carville: Clinton was lucky in his choice of enemies. Dan Burton shooting melons in his backyard. Some of these people were just unbelievable. And we forget how unpopular Gingrich was at the time. The public reasonably concluded that the drive to hound the president from office was both hypocritical and an overreaction. The House voted in favor of two articles of impeachment, finding that Clinton had committed perjury before the grand jury and had obstructed justice, but rejected accusations of perjury in the Jones case and of abuse of office.

I just never believed it was going to happen.


  • The Corner | National Review.
  • Learn Spanish Vocabulary - Series Taster - English/Spanish Flashcards (FLASHCARD EBOOKS)!
  • Transcript: Patrick Boyer: Our Scandalous Senate | Mar 17, 2015.
  • One-Minute Affirmations.
  • Cut to the Chase;
  • The Secret Plan.
  • Ray L a Hood : When the votes were taken—and I announced each one separately—I think people were surprised by the fact that Clinton was impeached by the House but not on all four impeachment articles. Barney Frank: One thing that never got enough attention was that the impeachment process was conducted by a lame-duck Congress. If the Congress elected in had voted, instead of the one that did vote, one of the articles would not have passed the House, because there were a number of pro-impeachment people who were defeated by anti-impeachment Democrats.

    Some weirdo from New Jersey was defeated. James Rogan: We had maybe half the Senate standing along the back rail of the House chamber watching the vote. There was just absolute, utter shock. Once Clinton was impeached, it fell to the Senate to put him on trial and decide whether to remove him from office. The trial was set to begin on January 7, One of their decisions was to host executive sessions for the full Senate, with no media present.

    They chose to meet in the Old Senate Chamber, which had housed the Senate until and then for decades was the home of the Supreme Court. In the public sessions, people were speaking to the camera, but in the executive sessions people were speaking to each other. They were very candid, very emotional sometimes. We had one question in particular about how we were going to proceed. James Rogan and Bob Barr were among the 13 House Judiciary Committee members selected as managers for the Senate trial—in effect, prosecutors. James Rogan: Trent Lott did handsprings trying to make it go away.

    I have 55 Republican senators, seven of whom are up for reelection next year in very tough races. You guys in the House just jumped off a cliff. The procedures were, from the standpoint of a trial attorney, laughable. We could call no live witnesses. They limited the overall evidence that we could use to only that evidence which already was in the public domain. So they made it impossible for us to present a strong case. Tom Daschle: If witnesses had been called, it would have been far more sensational, and we wanted to keep the sordid nature of some of this out of the public spectacle, to the extent we could.

    I think we always knew we had the votes not to convict. What I was more concerned about was ensuring that at the end of the day not one senator would say, Well, if I only had known this, I would have voted differently. David Kendall: The president apologized repeatedly for his conduct and to Ms. In every pleading we filed in the House and Senate, we repeated this apology, and on behalf of the president, my partner and I apologized directly and personally to Ms.

    Lewinsky in January , when her deposition was taken by the House managers as part of the Senate trial. After arguments in the Senate concluded, on February 9, senators repaired behind closed doors to deliberate. When they voted, on February 12, both articles were defeated. Forty-five senators voted to convict on perjury, and 50 on obstruction—well short of the 67 needed to remove Clinton from office. Shortly after the vote, the Capitol had to be evacuated because of a bomb scare. Some Democrats went to the White House to meet with Clinton.

    Tom Daschle: Within an hour after I had voted on impeachment, I was walking around the Air and Space Museum, because we all had to clear the building and we had no place to go. Julian Epstein: Clinton certainly felt the scarlet letter of impeachment. He was embarrassed and ashamed, for sure, and he felt like it had really hurt his second term.

    But he thought of himself as the Comeback Kid. I think he felt good about being vindicated. I think he felt good about beating Starr. Darrell Hammond: You had this person who was, you know, sort of a scallywag, but only on about a Daffy Duck level. He was sprung free. Bill M c Collum: It was all about the rule of law. Henry Hyde said those words over and over again, and people wondered, What in the world are you talking about?

    It was about upholding that rule of law. Lucianne Goldberg: This guy was a horndog. We chopped him alive. He never was the same. I just wanted people to know what kind of person he was. Privately, some Democrats felt the party would be better off if Clinton resigned and allowed Al Gore to become president ahead of the election. He narrowly won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College after the Supreme Court intervened in the Florida recount.

    The central thing, however, that he said he was going to do was restore honor and dignity to the White House, and that was code for everything that had happened. The Bush appeal was very clever, I have to say. In the Clinton era, I had all these women—Cabinet officers—I went out and talked to many of them, talked to Patricia Ireland of now. There were many women who liked his politics, so they gave him the benefit of the doubt.

    Now would they believe him? They also underscore how personal data has become the most prized commodity of the digital age, traded on a vast scale by some of the most powerful companies in Silicon Valley and beyond. The exchange was intended to benefit everyone.

    Pushing for explosive growth, Facebook got more users, lifting its advertising revenue. Partner companies acquired features to make their products more attractive. Facebook users connected with friends across different devices and websites. But Facebook also assumed extraordinary power over the personal information of its 2. But the documents, as well as interviews with about 50 former employees of Facebook and its corporate partners, reveal that Facebook allowed certain companies access to data despite those protections.

    An Engine for Growth

    They also raise questions about whether Facebook ran afoul of a consent agreement with the Federal Trade Commission that barred the social network from sharing user data without explicit permission. In all, the deals described in the documents benefited more than companies — most of them tech businesses, including online retailers and entertainment sites, but also automakers and media organizations. Their applications sought the data of hundreds of millions of people a month, the records show.

    The deals, the oldest of which date to , were all active in Some were still in effect this year. Contracts required the companies to abide by Facebook policies, he added. Still, Facebook executives have acknowledged missteps over the past year. Satterfield said. Facebook has found no evidence of abuse by its partners, a spokeswoman said.

    Some of the largest partners, including Amazon, Microsoft and Yahoo, said they had used the data appropriately, but declined to discuss the sharing deals in detail. With most of the partnerships, Mr.

    Zuckerberg explains the internet to Congress

    Satterfield said, the F. The partners were prohibited from using the personal information for other purposes, he said. Soltani and three former employees of the F. Facebook has been hammered with questions about its data sharing from lawmakers and regulators in the United States and Europe. The F. Zuckerberg to step aside as chairman. Shareholders also have filed a lawsuit alleging that executives failed to impose effective privacy safeguards.

    Angry users started a DeleteFacebook movement. This month, a British parliamentary committee investigating internet disinformation released internal Facebook emails , seized from the plaintiff in another lawsuit against Facebook. The messages disclosed some partnerships and depicted a company preoccupied with growth, whose leaders sought to undermine competitors and briefly considered selling access to user data.

    Personal data is the oil of the 21st century, a resource worth billions to those who can most effectively extract and refine it. Few companies have better data than Facebook and its rival, Google, whose popular products give them an intimate view into the daily lives of billions of people — and allow them to dominate the digital advertising market.

    Facebook has never sold its user data, fearful of user backlash and wary of handing would-be competitors a way to duplicate its most prized asset. Instead, internal documents show, it did the next best thing: granting other companies access to parts of the social network in ways that advanced its own interests. Facebook began forming data partnerships when it was still a relatively young company.

    At the same time, Facebook got critical data back from its partners. A look through the eyes of a group of somethings at the obstacles they face in making their mark on the world. The lives of a rambunctious Syrian refugee family of 13 intersect with their community of enthusiastic sponsors in Picton, Ont. Arctic Secrets.

    It's November at Cape Tatnam. Winter is coming to the lower Western shore of Hudson Bay.

    Patrick Boyer: Our Scandalous Senate

    But the ice, which should be forming on Hudson Bay by now is nowhere to be seen. Scientist and author Diana Beresford-Kroeger explores our profound biological and spiritual connection with trees. With humanity changing the planet's biosphere at an unprecedented scale, climate survivors, scientists, and others explore ecological transformation.

    Brilliant Ideas. July 9, - Discover the story of one of the most well-known performance artists ever, Marina Abramovic. This documentary follows several refugee families during their first 19 days in Canada at a resettlement centre in Calgary. Filmmaker Shelley Saywell and singer-activist Lorraine Segato document the music and stories of people on the margins of society in Toronto.

    The Agenda with Steve Paikin. July 8, - Ann Hui discusses her book, "Chop Suey Nation," a history of Chinese food in Canada and an intimate retelling of her family's own story.