What evidence do you have that Linda Tripp is insane?
Okay, insane was too harsh. How about paranoid, conniving, manipulative, greedy, selfish, back-stabber.
Discovery is limited to those matters reasonably calculated to lead to relevant evidence. You can't simply ask a President or any other litigant anything.
Just like a lawyer to start backtracking when you're cornered. I think you're wrong (but I'm not the lawyer). As I remember, you cannot object to or refuse to answer a deposition question on the grounds of relevance, so anything but privileged matters is fair game. Now, admittedly, with the PJ depo it's a different matter because the judge was in the room which is very unusual, right? But under normal discovery anything goes in a deposition and it's all under oath. So what's to prevent fishing expeditions during a deposition? And even if the judge makes mincemeat of the questioning later, the damage has been done; the lies have been leaked to the press; and the scandal has begun.
As for
Klayman, he is proceeding uder a number of Federal Statutes (such as FOIA) and
other doctrines (shareholder derivative suit in the Allstate matter) which allow for
private enforcement.
You keep tipping the ball back into your own net, JLA. Thanks for making the point for me that the laws are so flexible that you can do anything with them. I especially like the one that because sexual harrassment involves subordinates, you can ask about sexual relations with all of them, even consensual sex. (Yes, I already know that this is a position that Democrats support, doesn't mean I don't think it's ridiculous.) That's a discovery loophole that anyone could drive a truck through.
As for the Republican hopefuls you smeared in your closing, how many of them lied under oath and admitted it?
Hmm, I'd love to open up Newt's and Phil's divorce files and take a shot. Already, some Republicans have lined up at the confessional: I especially liked Rep Dan Burton's mea culpa to his constituents. It belongs in the pantheon with Clinton's: "If you hear something that you think Danny boy shouldn't have done, you can trust me to come clean." What?!?!? Anyway, that's not my point. I don't want to put them under oath and find out. Leave 'em alone and let us back to politics on the merits of policy, not on personality.
Doughboy. |
