Was Clinton impeached for sexual deviance?

Anonymous asked this question on 5/4/2000:

I am always interested in the "What if this had happened?", scenario, in both politics and great historical actions.
Everyone seems to be so miserable, since we have all had to endure this latest schtick, that had happened in the White House.
I would like to know in the philosophical, of politics if the following had happened, within the oval office.
Say Bill was standing there and Monica was where she was said to be. But instead of putting her lips on you know what, she had sucked his knee cap instead, but they were still discovered.
How would this slightly different reference to you know who's anatomy, would have changed the frame of reference of the American political scene?
How would this have effected the American public, or have possibly saved the Democratic Party?
We are all only acting like we are currently acting, because in whatever respect we have reacted to this situation, it more than likely was a taught reaction, that we had all learned from our collective upbringings?

JesseGordon gave this response on 5/12/2000:

In response to my colleague's suggestion that, had Clinton been caught doing something "deviant" like kneecap-sucking, he'd have been removed from office:

Clinton DID do a number of "deviant" things with Monica. That's what made the Starr Report such good reading!

Starr's report, you'll recall, had a number of references to cigars. It detailed Monica's insertion of cigars, and the subsequent smoking of the same cigar, with the President then stating "Tastes good." (I've often thought that Clinton could pay off all his legal debts forever by simply doing one cigar commercial, where he lights up, looks at the camera with a smile, and says "Tastes good.")

While I found it sad that we were spending tax money exploring this activity, I certainly considered it "deviant." Clinton had these deviations fully explored, and survived impeachment anyway. Hence, I think that kneecap-sucking would have been considered another deviant behavior and included in the Starr Report.

In general, to your "What-If" question, I don't think the whole Monica incident was about sex at all. It was more about Clinton's cover-up, and his denials under oath, and his general inappropriate behavior in office. Certainly knee-cap sucking would not be an impeachable offense. But neither is ANY form of sexual activity! The impeachable offenses were AFTER Monica was gone. And Clinton would have gotten into trouble if he denied and lied about and covered up kneecap-sucking just as much as he did for other sucking.

The big difference would have been how the House prosecutors looked when it was all over. They looked pretty bad as it was, impeaching Clinton for his cover up of tawdry sex. They would have impeached him for kneecap sucking too, but would have ended up looking even sillier when the American public read the "What-If" version of the Starr Report detailing all about knees.

Anonymous rated this answer:

There are the tenets of what he had done, that is considered wrong. Such as the beginning of his political career, when he was in Arkansas. Actually George Bush and Bill Clinton, do intersect each other, with reference to the Meina County Air Port scandal.
Ah, but the CIA had covered this up and we will never known the never about it. Why is Bill Clinton in there? I do not know. Seems to be good guy, then a bad gut gets into government? Who knows? Weirder things have happened .I'm not shorting you on the stars, but for reason of chance future potentialities, I will only give you four stars. You will rate higher later. Thank you very much.

Return to index