Historical investigations

Lewinsky, Jones & impeachment

A real relationship. False testimony. Several different legal outcomes.

Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky at the White House, February 28, 1997. The photograph documents a meeting; it does not depict the underlying misconduct.
Barbara Kinney / White House Photograph Office · Source & image context ↗

RECORD / AT A GLANCE

Misconduct documented; Senate acquittal

Clinton acknowledged an inappropriate relationship and accepted professional sanctions for misleading deposition answers. He was acquitted by the Senate; the civil Jones settlement contained no admission. These outcomes answer different questions.

THE EVENTS / THE INVESTIGATION / THE STORY

The chronology.

READ THE FILE

Evidence & assessment.

Open an article for its evidence, labeled AI assessment and numbered sources. Read the complete static edition ↗

WATCH THE ORIGINAL

Recordings, with context.

External links only. No embedded players, autoplay or tracking requests from the editorial page.

OPEN THE RECORD

Sources & limits.

Numbered citations in each article identify the relevant sources. These records have different purposes and evidentiary weight.

  1. Clinton Library: Monica Lewinsky records, Legislative Affairs ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  2. Bill Clinton, televised statement after grand-jury testimony, August 17, 1998 ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  3. Monica Lewinsky: Emerging from the House of Gaslight in the Age of #MeToo (2018) ↗

    Lewinsky’s own retrospective account, not a criminal adjudication. Her interpretation changed over time; this guide does not substitute its own diagnosis or legal finding.

  4. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997): Supreme Court opinion ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  5. UPI contemporaneous account of the November 13, 1998 settlement ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  6. Jones v. Clinton, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1118 (1999): civil contempt opinion ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  7. Text of the Clinton–Jones settlement, November 1998 ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  8. Arkansas Committee on Professional Conduct: agreed order, case 2000-013 ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  9. Presidential statement on legal resolution, January 19, 2001 (Weekly Compilation) ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  10. Official Senate record: articles adopted by the House December 19, 1998 ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  11. Senate roll call 17: grand-jury perjury article, February 12, 1999 ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  12. Senate roll call 18: obstruction article, February 12, 1999 ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.

  13. U.S. Senate: the impeachment process and historical outcomes ↗

    Contemporaneous or historical source; conclusions are limited to the investigation, proceeding or statements identified in its title.