~OT~ Chuzz, to reduce this whole thing to just lying about sex is wrong, too. I hate to get tied up in these discussions on this thread, but I can't let that one go unanswered. The evidence appears to be there that the Prez not only perjured himself, but that he suborned perjury, as well. Is this any way for the chief law enforcement officer of the U. S. to act?
If the Paula Jones case is without merit, why did they settle it, and why did he lie in his testimony in that suit? Apparently the President scoffed at William Weld's suggestion today that he be censured (and action for which there is no constitutional power given to Congress), and be fined by Congress, to boot. He's willing to settle the Jones case and not accept the slap on the hands of censure and a fine???
Don't you find it interesting that in all of these scandals- Watergate, Iran-Contra, Whitewater (et al)- that some people have been convicted of crimes related to these "non offenses", when all-the-while the apologists for both sides, respectively, said that it was just this or just that whenever it suited their case?
I'm really disgusted by the hypocrisy and selective memory on both sides. Nevertheless, I would not expect anything other than the fair and just application of constitutional law, regardless of who the offender is.
Regards,
LoD |
