Hi,
I wonder if any of the Clinton detractors can make an accusation without the word " IF ", in the sentence. You suggest an apology for those you disbelieve Tripp, are you also going to suggest those who bashed Clinton do the same, if nothing proves conclusive?
Personally, I'm not so sure Tripp was lying, but rather, was Lewinsky truthful when she said the things she did in confidence to her? There could be 101 reasons for Lewinsky to fabricate nonsense in what she thought was a personal and confidential conversations with a co-worker.
My opinion is there is no immunity for Monica, because Starr isn't so sure that she has any conclusive damaging info. If Starr's case was as strong as some suggest and ML could bolster that case, I'd be amazed if he did not jump all over that. I'd guess he'd give immunity to a pion to get the big fish in a NY minute!. Still doesn't add up to the truly objective. Still the only "facts?", are, he said, she said, that she said! Oh, and unnamed sources, I forgot about them. Then there is everybodies interpretatation of leaks, which seems to be accepted as evidence under oath? Remember that is a pretty big word.....IF.......When making an alligation see IF we can leave that word out......
Frank |
