|
jeff: this isn't the thread to do it on, but briefly, (1) i think the war powers act was unconstitutional and i'm not aware that clinton can claim that lying under oath is unconstitutional; (2) reagan didn't set up a secret govt, he or his aides - and it's not clear what he knew, and now we'll never know - ended up funneling money to groups resisting communism, which is not quite the same as using the power of the office to set a wonderful example for a 22-yr.-old intern or to try to get monica not to tell the truth (and vernon jordan's testimony seems to nail clinton on this point); (3) reagan didn't knowingly ask his friends to lie for him; (4) walsh spent 7 years on his investigation, spent more money, so far, than starr, got no jail time for any of his targets and no convictions - just plea bargains by people who couldn't afford to fight the endless resources of the independent cousel - (btw, i'm against the law itself), compared to starr who has the second highest number of convictions of any indep counsel, including a governor and an associate attorney general; (5) reagan voulnteered to testify twice and did so once i bleieve compared to clinton who said he would and didn't, who was asked 6 times to and finally did only under compulsion, and, finally, (6) reagan, against the advice of most of his advisors, managed to back gorbachev into a corner, knock the berlin wall down, and free millions of people who are now trying to learn how to be free after almost 3 genreations of slavery. i have no problem with how history will judge each of these presidents. regards, red jinn |
