<<OT - Lee: It is a tangled web that was woven (my apologies in advance to the Bard) but it isn't linear (and it isn't over):
During the investigation and the testimony before the Grand Jury, evidence that the President may have lied under oath became significant enough that a three judge panel agreed, along with Ms. Reno, that it warranted expansion of Starr's inquiry. Thus, another track began and that has been the primary focus of the effort.
That does not mean there isn't more; in any prosecution, the prosecutor is prone to take a fast-track to conviction. (After all, they got Al Capone on tax evasion, not murder, conspiracy, etc.)
IF, they get Bill on this one, it brings into question his credibility in ALL of the other issues and inquiries. First, prove the behavior (lying) then use that to diminish his credibility in the other cases. Sound reasoning for a prosecutor.
The first train has pulled into the station; he has an opportunity to get on it and get out of town before the other charges mount.
This is hardball - and this administration has played it, too.
More trains to follow - you can almost hear the whistles. |
