The problem is perjury, suborning a witness, suppressing evidence, abuse of the powers of his office, et al. Clinton has apparently committed acts which a number of people are now in jail for.
Right. Who's in jail for these acts? How does this compare with Ronald Reagan and the Boland amendment? Or George Bush, who was "out of the loop" on Iran/Contra? Not to mention the little matter of the "secret" Grand Jury investigation Starr was conducting. He took an oath too, you know.
And how many of the S&L crooks went to jail besides poor Susan McDougal and her late husband? Who were, by all indications, the tiniest of fish in that swamp? How many witness have been routinely coached by presidents of all sides to perjure themselves before Congress? Like Clarence "I never, ever gave a thought to Roe V. Wade" Thomas? He was the best man for the job, you know. Or all politicians of all stripes who go for the convenient "I can't remember"?
It's hard to defend Clinton, he's an embarrassment. But this has been a partisan witchhunt from the start. From the moment Jesse Helms and Lauch Faircloth went to see the judge they had gotten appointed and told him who they wanted for special prosecutor. If somebody gives me some indication of politicians of any stripe taking this "I swear to tell the truth" business seriously, I'll start taking this particular instance of "perjury" seriously. If this is a high crime, we may as well abolish the office. I'd say Bill Clinton was justified in considering the whole thing political, and acting accordingly. You find me an honest voice on the other side, I'll reconsider.
Cheers, Dan. |
