Doug, like the president, you are taking a very legal approach to this thing, while impeachment proceedings encompass quite a bit more than legal abuses.
Were he on trial in a criminal court for perjury, you could argue his case has merit based on the cite you used yesterday. Prosecutors, no doubt would point to several instances where he sought not to tell the truth, and then a verdict would be rendered.
But, really, that seems irrelevant to me right now, since Congress must look at other things. Like, did he use sound judgment expected of a president? Was national security put at blackmail risk? Did he abuse the court system and finesse the laws he swore to uphold? How damaging was his "that woman" lie to the public? Should he be accountable for his delaying tactics of 7 months? Weakened from this, can he govern?
Those are the questions that Congress will deal with, in addition to the criminal allegations Starr has made. So, for the time being we don't have to worry about whether he can beat the rap, legally that is. |
