There was also no legal basis for requiring him to answer. He could always refused to go forward on fifth amendment grounds.
In this area Clinton outmaneuvered Starr a bit.
He WANTED to answer most of what Starr was asking. But avoided using the fifth as a reason for not answering the rest. Starr COULDN'T compel him there and then, because he was there voluntarily. If Starr had recalled him for those very few things he didn't answer, he could have refused to go, using the Fifth, but explaining to the people he had answered all but deeply detailed sexual questions.
And actually, Clinton did in essence answer all that Starr asked. He in effect admitted he had oral sex. He also indicated that if it could be proven he had intercourse, or his flesh touched Monica's in either of two locations, with the intent of stimulating and gratifying her (i.e., not accidentally or fleetingly), that he had technically lied under oath. (It would be perjury if material to the Jones case (which I think it quite clearly was not), and if his remembered he had done those things.)
So I think it really was mostly a matter of some sreds of Presidential dignity that he was trying to preserve.
No jury would convict him of perjury for either his GJ testimony, or, probably, his Jones testimony. I say probably with respect to the latter because I haven't seen that tape. Yet. Bet that tapes helps him also, though. Because we can count on Starr's having overstated the case against him there as well. And because of how he explained that testimony in the GJ testimony.
Doug |
