The author certainly had a lot to say............
This sums it up pretty well though.....
“AGAINST impeachment proceedings against President Clinton”
I’m fairly sure Thompson voted to convict on one or more charges and to acquit on one.
And no Senator can vote “against impeachment proceedings.” Only the House has the power to impeach. The impeachment TRIAL is held in the Senate.
Secondly, Thompson found the President guilty on one charge but felt that the prosecution had not met the burden of proof on the other charge. His explanation of his vote is thought provoking and screams “Federalist”.
If you are quoting the article correctly, the author is something of an idiot, and perhaps also lying.
Senators don't vote on impeachment proceedings, that's done in the House. Senators vote to convict on impeachment charges.
Thompson voted to convict on Obstruction of Justice but not on Perjury. Only one such charge is needed to remove a president from office.
There was a reason for that. He didn't want Algore as president because with the incumbency, he would have been reelected in 2000.
“AGAINST impeachment proceedings against President Clinton”
That is just more half truth intended to mislead though!
Fred Thompson voted for impeachment, on grounds of obstruction of justice, not perjury).
The perjury charge was defeated with 55 "not guilty" votes and 45 "guilty" votes.
On the obstruction-of-justice article, the Senate was evenly split, 50-50.
I believe that is why Thompson could adamantly state that Libby was clearly not guilty and that he would have pardoned Libby immediately after that verdict. Let the MSM and Viguerie suck on that for a while.