j g, I agree with Michael, who put it very plainly: "Either we as a society believe and support honesty, or we don't. Their is no gray area for me here. And I don't believe there should be. Lying in a court of law is wrong! Period. Wrong! And especially wrong for the Commander in Chief, the one entrusted to uphold the rule of law and the Constitution."
Not only is lying in court wrong, but perjury is a felony, and our Constitution tells us that felons cannot hold the office of President. That is a Constitutional absolute in regard to the rule of law; it is not a grey area. This is why Clinton, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, will not admit to having committed perjury.
your post included the sentence, "His efforts to disguise his actions have failed..." Interesting word, that "disguise". In what guise did the President present his relationship with Monica? What was his intent in his Paula Jones deposition, when the President stated there was "no extramarital affair" between himself and Monica? We have a strong hint in the President's appearance on National TV: "Let me be firm about this: I did not have a sexual relationship, or any improper relationship with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." end quote.
Anyone wishing to devine whether the President intended to feloniously perjured himself in his Paula Jones deposition would have quite a strong hint in those comments.
Congress knows its duty. It is a serious one, but one which cannot be ignored, dropped, or censured away. |
