Talk:Paula Jones
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
 |
It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead. |
The article says:
"Many believe that Jones's lawsuit contributed to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, eventually leading to the impeachment of Bill Clinton."
Everyone believes that because it did. Clinton was impeached for lying and obstructing justice (asking others to lie) in the Paula Jones sexual harrassment lawsuit. The questions he lied about were about Monica. The attorneys were trying to prove a pattern of misconduct with subordinate employees.
This should be re-written to be more clear.
Contents |
[edit] Eschewal
What is it?
[edit] Pay out
quote "Jones settled with Clinton for $850,000" who paid whom?
- Clinton paid Jones. I just changed the article to reflect that. Thanks. Dave Farquhar 19:44, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What about the wast right-wing conspiracy? I read somewhere that Paula Jones told she was payed to say this about Clinton Mastgrr 13:01, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] neutral standpoint - Copied?
This article is not presented from a neutral standpoint. It reads like it was pasted in from something written by Clinton's campaign manager. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.158.117.244 (talk • contribs) .
[edit] Notes
Clinton was not able to be impreached because of his "extracurricular" activites for his relations do not have anything to do persay with the ability of the president to run the country. A president must be impreached because he broke the law and because adultry is not an impeachable crime it may be best to repeal the idea that the accusations of Paula Jones had any direct coorolation to the impeachment. It may be best to redue that section. Thanks for listening —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.54.213.238 (talk • contribs) .
You don't know what you are talking about! Clinton was impeached. That is the process the house goes through, and they voted the articles of impeachment which caused him to be tried in the Senate, where he was not convicted. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, not adultery. Go read the Wikipedia article on "The Impeachment of William Clinton" if you want an overview of the events. The impeachment was very directly based on the Paula Jones lawsuit and the lies Clinton told in defending himself against it.
[edit] Other books
Much information about the Paula Jones case, Jones herself, and her lawyers' connections with the Kenneth Starr case are available in Conason and Lyons' book 'The Hunting of the President.' I have added only the fact that the tale of the 'distinguishing characteristic' was fabricated by Jones's 'elves' and later proven to be false. As far as the earlier comments go, the impeachment was a direct result of illegal collusion between the Jones lawyers and Kenneth Starr's OIC. Additionally, the entire accusation of perjury on Clinton's part, while technically true, was made possible by a 'perjury trap,' which is illegal on its face and was made possible by illegal acts by lawyers and investigators for both Starr and Jones. These are facts, not partisan speculation. This article, while maintaining its neutrality, must be revised to include the entire truth. 72.150.175.35 00:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Max Black
[edit] copypaste
128.171.76.165 added "copypaste tag" without citing where the copypaste came from? Move till cited. Telecine Guy 03:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
