Sex and power

Lewinsky, Paula Jones and impeachment

An affair with an intern, a lawsuit, false testimony, a contempt finding and a Senate acquittal

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

Affair admitted / false testimony found by a judge / acquitted by the Senate

The core facts are not in dispute any more: the relationship happened, Clinton misled the public and a court, and he paid for it with a contempt finding and his law license. He was not convicted of a crime.

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 ↗

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. Miller Center: Clinton’s 26 Jan 1998 response to the Lewinsky allegations (video and transcript) ↗

    The “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” denial, in full.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  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. PolitiFact: Trump says Hillary Clinton “viciously” attacked Bill Clinton’s accusers, 10 Oct 2016 ↗

    Woman-by-woman review of what Hillary Clinton said and did. Draws on Bernstein, Stephanopoulos and the NYT.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

Discussion

Comment, dispute or support a claim, submit a source or rate this page through a short Google Form. It asks you to sign in with Google so we know you are a real person; your email is never shown. Nothing appears here until it has been reviewed. Conversation on X tagged #AIFiles #AIFilesClintons shows up below after the daily refresh.

CommentSubmit a sourceRate this pageStart a discussion on XFull forum topicSee all disputesFollow updates (Google Group)

Reader comments

Approved reader comments and ratings appear here when JavaScript is on.

On X

Posts from the daily snapshot appear here when JavaScript is on. You can read this subject’s threads on the forum: Forum: #AIFilesClintons.

Reader comments are shown only after review, and rows removed from the form’s sheet disappear at the next refresh. X posts are a read-only daily snapshot; posts deleted or made private there are removed at the next refresh. Inclusion is not endorsement. A submitted source stays pending review until a page update says otherwise.