I honestly think most lawyers, if exercising their best judgment on the issue, rather than zealous representing their "client" or side (as lawyers are certainly wont to do), would think that any Clinton conviction on perjury either before the Grand Jury or in the Jones case, under all the circumstances, was very, very unlikely, after seeing this tape.
It is perfectly true that the President explained again and again real hairsplitting of words, in terms of how he responded in the Jones deposition. But the point for those with eyes to see is that he fully admitted that this is what he was doing. He also gave some very good reasons why he thought he was both legally, and morally, entitled to do so.
Those who hate him will see that he was twisting words. As will the unsophisticated as well, before hearing the defense attorney's arguments, etc. He was doing so. And had a legal right to. And made a good case for why he felt he had a moral right to, given the circumstances of the Jones lawsuit. As I have previously explained.
Why do you suppose the market came back so much as the tape was 2/3 through or so? Actually, started sooner than that. And kept going back to neutral then positive as the tape completed.
Doug |
