"I can't say it wasn't," which is a considerable step from saying it was.  As for me, I can say it wasn't.  What it was was an effort to enforce the law against a scofflaw, someone who lied even when the truth would suffice, and finally did so under oath.  And the difference between Nixon and Clinton was that, while Nixon at least had the fig leaf of claiming that his abuses of power were to protect national security (rightly or wrongly), Clinton's were for the more veal motive of protecting his own ample posterior.

Funny how we blame the press for spin and them we do it here.  

Its been clear all along that the Clinton impeachment was a complex legal and political mess.  I appreciate Hyde coming clean that it was part politics - like this is a big suprise to anyone.  But, he also reiterated that it was also, in his opinion, about upholding the law and fulfilling his obligations as a Congressman.  He didn't "say Clinton impeachment was retaliation for Nixon" as you assert, he simply admits it might have been part of the issue.  I DO think this is a noteworthy admission but only just an admission of what everyone has known all along.

ABC is also guilty as to the way they spin his second guessing.  His second guessing was only due to the unfair personal attacks he endured for an affair that had occurred 40 years earlier.  Funny, the same folks who claim the Republicans were motivated by politics in delving into Clinton's life drag up a 40 year old affair.  Both sides are STILL hypocritical on this one.

BTW: I don't like the guy, so don't take this post as a defense of him or his voting record in Congress.