Betty,
Any number of commentators (lawyers, I mean, who have experience with perjury) have said over past few months that there is lying in court and there is perjury. Not all lying actually constitutes perjury as a practical matter, and certainly not all lying is prosecuted. I'm afraid I can't go into all of the intricate details here, I've already spent far more time on this thread than I should, but I'm quite sure we'll be hearing a lot about it from the talking heads on the tube over the next couple of months as well.
By the way, it wasn't a "criminal investigation", as you say, it was a civil suit. And it was a civil suit which shouldn't even have been brought in the first place, and would have been thrown out a lot sooner if it didn't have a political motivation. Furthermore, the questions to which he allegedly lied were later ruled immaterial to the proceeding. They were just fishing expeditions, traps that shouldn't even have been allowed and were eventually disallowed. Also, the only thing that Supreme Court ruled on was whether the case should have gone forward while Clinton was still President, not anything else. |
