SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: i-node who wrote (149756)8/16/2002 11:46:22 AM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) of 1574006
 
Clinton was lying to hide that he was committing adultery.

The liberal position that lying about CERTAIN things under oath is acceptable while lying about OTHER things is NOT, is a totally baffling proposition. By definition, lying under oath is NEVER acceptable.

It is beyond reasonableness to suggest that a person testifying UNDER OATH should be able to lie, without regard for the subject. What is the PURPOSE of the oath in the first place? If the judge felt the answer wasn't important, she would undoubtedly have said, "you don't have to answer that question".

I'd appreciate your serious answer to the following:

(1) Do you believe our judicial system will function if a WITNESS is permitted, without consequence, to decide on which subjects he will be truthful versus those in which he will lie? Should we abolish the concept of perjury altogether?

(2) What is the purpose of the "oath"?


I am concerned with the crime not all the details you choose to focus on. Just as you would not execute a man for speeding but you would were he to commit murder, I see a big difference between lying about committing adultery and lying about breaking into an office.

Adultery is not a punishable crime; breaking into an office and stealing documents is. And before you go off, I don't care that Clinton lied "under oath", the crime is the issue. And you know the difference..........you are choosing to hang Clinton for whatever motivation, and because some of us will not buy into your morality play, you suggest that we are amoral. That's all a bunch of crap.

Our judicial system functions in spite of the fact that people lie on some issues and tell the truth on others......and it happens every day. Clinton got away with squat. Do you honestly think it matters if he had been sentenced or not, or lost the presidency? He was humiliated in front of over 250+ million people many of whom had elected him to office and humiliated in front of the varying peoples of this planet. If you think that any other permissible punishment could have been worse than that, then I have not a clue as to where you are coming from. Any idiot watching Clinton today knows the shame he carries.........he wears it like a scarlet letter. I don't condone what he did at all......he's an adult and knew better, but I do feel sorry for the guy. He's old enough that he probably won't ever recover from the humiliation. No one wants to see someone do that to themselves.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext