WI: clinton impeached for kosovo

[Hades]

In OTL, Clinton violated the War Clause by initiating bombing of Serbia without congressional approval.

WI, that was included in articles of impeachment?

 

[BlairWitch749]

clinton by that late a time in his presidency had enough popular support because of the economy that he wasnt going to be kicked out under any circumstances.

i think it would have been more useful to try him for corruption regarding the lincoln bedroom scandal. (for those not familiar clinton rented the lincoln bedroom out like a motel six in return for campaign contributions.) than perjury in the sexual harassment deal. they should have also included the campaign contributions from Chinese communists IMO those are more serious charges than perjury about an extra marital affair

 

[Desmond Hume]

In OTL, Clinton violated the War Clause by initiating bombing of Serbia without congressional approval.

WI, that was included in articles of impeachment?

The articles of impeachment were drawn up in December '98, months before the bombing campaign against Serbia started. For that matter, IIRC the Senate trial was over before the bombing campaign started.

 

[Hades]

The articles of impeachment were drawn up in December '98, months before the bombing campaign against Serbia started. For that matter, IIRC the Senate trial was over before the bombing campaign started.

wouldnt the serbia bombing have been grounds for impeachment?

Clinton ordering military action without congressional approval is worse than lying about adultery.

But still, h one upped nixon, who bombed laos without approval and ept it secret. Clinton bombed serbia, and got praised for it.

 

[Hyperion]

I'm assuming that in TTL, there is no European support, as in OTL.

 

[MerryPrankster]

I'm assuming that in TTL, there is no European support, as in OTL.

The Kosovo War was the Europeans' idea--Tony Blair told Milosevic if he kept acting like he did, there would be war with Britain in six months. I think the French were involved too.

In any event, European support is irrelevant if the House decides Clinton is violating the Constitution re: war powers.

 

[Files]

American presidents have been waging war without explicit congressional approval (definitely with tacit approval) for a big chunk of our history. Impeaching Clinton for the same thing would call into question a big part of American national mythology.

What I'm saying is, I think you'd need a pretty big POD for this to work.

 

[Dan Reilly The Great]

As I recall something like 60-65% of americans supported sending ground troops into Serbia on top of air strikes, I seriously doubt that congress is going to make such an unpopular move, especially so soon after failing to get clinton out of office on something unrelated.

 

[MerryPrankster]

American presidents have been waging war without explicit congressional approval (definitely with tacit approval) for a big chunk of our history. Impeaching Clinton for the same thing would call into question a big part of American national mythology.

What I'm saying is, I think you'd need a pretty big POD for this to work.

That may be why nobody in the right places seriously considered it.

After all, FDR was waging a secret war in China pre-Pearl Harbor (the Flying Tigers), Truman sent soldiers to Korea in the name of the UN, etc.

Thing is, in the case of Vietnam, the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq, they all had Congressional approval even if they were not technically declared wars.

Kosovo did not. The House of Reps tied when the vote came, it was technically illegal.

 

[Faeelin]

i think it would have been more useful to try him for corruption regarding the lincoln bedroom scandal. (for those not familiar clinton rented the lincoln bedroom out like a motel six in return for campaign contributions.) than perjury in the sexual harassment deal. they should have also included the campaign contributions from Chinese communists IMO those are more serious charges than perjury about an extra marital affair

This is sorta like how Bush handed out ambassadorships like party favors, only less serious, right?

 

[CalBear]

In OTL, Clinton violated the War Clause by initiating bombing of Serbia without congressional approval.

...

Based on what?

The War Powers Clause is very specific. It relates to the declaration of war, not any other military action.

The War Powers Act of 1973 gives the POTUS 2 days before he even has to TELL Congress what he is doing and 60 days before he has to withdraw forces without Congressional approval (BTW: The Act itself is almost certainly unconstitutional but no one in either the Executive or Legislative Branch has chosen to push the issue.)

 

[Desmond Hume]

wouldnt the serbia bombing have been grounds for impeachment?

Clinton ordering military action without congressional approval is worse than lying about adultery.

But still, h one upped nixon, who bombed laos without approval and ept it secret. Clinton bombed serbia, and got praised for it.

Well, pretty much every US president since FDR has waged war without Congressional approval/ declaration of war, and none of them got impeached for it. And since the Republicans had just impeached Clinton and failed spectacularly to get a conviction, I can't really see them trying again. Remember what impeachment cost the Republicans: it destroyed the career of a Speaker who just a couple years earlier was arguably more powerful than the president, caused the public humiliation and resignation of his replacement, imperiled their hard-won congressional majorities, and eventually caused the electoral defeat of every single House trial manager except Lindsey Graham, who is AFAIK the only leading figure from that time on the Republican side who still has a political career of any kind.

So disregarding whether or not impeachment was justified, it would have been a terribly stupid move politically, which means the Republicans wouldn't have done it.

 

[Valdemar II]

This is sorta like how Bush handed out ambassadorships like party favors, only less serious, right?

In all fairness that is a long American tradition. Of course so is the low ethic and borderline corruptions in gathering campaign funds.

 

[Orville_third]

It would have required an alliance between Peace and Non-interventionist Democrats and Isolationist, Noninterventionist, and maybe some just-plain Clinton-hating Republicans. It likely wouldn't have worked in the House- and even if it did, it wouldn't have gotten far in the Senate.

HOWEVER, if Republicans remember Hussein Kamil's 1995 remarks to CNN or uncover his debriefing after his defection, they can accuse Clinton of bombing Iraq to divert attention from impeachment- and they'd have evidence to prove he was lying about Iraqi WMD! (Of course, it means that Bush wouldn't be able to go into Iraq in 2003...)

 

[MacCaulay]

This is sorta like how Bush handed out ambassadorships like party favors, only less serious, right?

In all fairness that is a long American tradition. Of course so is the low ethic and borderline corruptions in gathering campaign funds.

Valdemar's right. Every President has done it. Sure, there's certain countries you make sure you name an important person too: Obama made sure the guy going to China spoke Chinese and knew the country.

But to some place like France or Canada or, say, the Virgin Islands, then you just make sure everyone there knows their job and hand the lead to someone who gave your campaign a shitload of money. Democrats do it, and Republicans do it.