Differences Between Johnson And Clinton Impeachment

606 Words3 Pages

Impeachment is a process in which the President, Vice President, or a high-ranking official is accused of an unlawful activity which leads to possible removal from office. The grounds for impeachment are treason, bribery, or other high crimes. The impeachment process is outlined in Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 of the Constitution. In an impeachment, Senate has the power to try an impeachment, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the impeachment, and the House of Representatives writes up the charges. In an impeachment in order for the defendant to be removed from office, two-thirds of the senate must vote to convict the defendant. In history two Presidents have been impeached; Andrew Johnson and William Clinton. One President faced almost certain impeachment which led to resignation; Richard Nixon. The reasons, processes, and outcome of these three cases show the differences in the cases. …show more content…

Although Nixon was not impeached, he did have a reason for resignation. Johnson faced eleven articles of impeachment and Clinton faced two. Johnson’s two major crimes were violating the Tenure of Office Act which said that in order for the President to remove certain office holders, he had to go through the senate to do so, and violating the army appropriations act which said that in order for the President to issue a military order, he had to go through a commanding general. Clinton’s two accusations were lying under oath to a federal grand jury involving an affair with Monica Lewinsky he tried to cover up, and obstructing justice. Although Nixon was not impeached, his reason for resignation was his involvement in the Watergate Scandal in which he covered up wiretapping of phones and stealing of secret

More about Differences Between Johnson And Clinton Impeachment