Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: halfscot who wrote (8120)	2/22/1998 9:02:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Respond to of 20981

Guilty is as guilty does. Here's one from the Prez chomping to tell the truth: If Clinton receives a summons from Starr, his lawyers plan to argue that a sitting president cannot be forced to comply. The drawback to this is that it might make him look guilty. SUNDAY TIMES: February 22 1998 White House aides fear Clinton may have to confront grand jury by Matthew Campbell, Washington A GRAND jury investigating the "Zippergate" scandal may summon Bill Clinton to respond in person to allegations that he had sex with Monica Lewinsky, a former White House trainee, and then tried to cover it up. Bracing themselves for the worst, Clinton's lawyers were said last week to be discussing the political costs of defying any subpoena from Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel investigating the case. After interrogating White House officials, secretaries and servants, investigators have yet to hear evidence from Lewinsky, who boasted of an affair with the president to friends, one of whom, Linda Tripp, handed tapes of their conversations to Starr. Nor has the grand jury questioned Vernon Jordan, the Washington lawyer and master fixer allegedly asked to find Lewinsky a job in New York. The White House is taking seriously the possibility of a summons being issued to Clinton, raising questions about how long he can go on declining to answer questions about Lewinsky - other than to deny an "improper relationship" with "that woman". Clinton cites a gag order imposed by a judge to justify his refusal to say why Lewinsky visited the White House 37 times after leaving her job there in 1996. In fact, the order covers only lawyers and prosecutors, not Clinton. The president's strategy has unnerved some of his most senior advisers, leaving him increasingly isolated. Few of his crisis managers risk talking to him about Lewinsky for fear that they, too, will be hauled before the grand jury. "If you talk to him at all, the unspoken mutual concern is: don't say anything that will get you in trouble. Don't say anything that will get me in trouble," said one of Clinton's long-time friends from his home state of Arkansas. One aide believed to have delved delicately into the affair - and therefore an important witness for Starr - is Bruce Lindsey, the president's closest adviser. Last week he led a retinue of lawyers to a federal court to skirmish with Starr's prosecutors over whether the uncertain legal doctrine of "executive privilege" could be invoked to sidestep questions. No agreement was reached, and their legal battle may end up before the Supreme Court, adding a constitutional dimension to a scandal that began with reports of oral sex in the Oval office. Others appear to be displaying less commitment than Lindsey to an administration that risks being enmeshed in legal wrangling for months to come. Mike McCurry, the presidential spokesman who sets great store by his ability to weigh his words, prompted a debate about tensions in the White House last week when he said Clinton's explanation of his relationship with Lewinsky was "going to end up being a very complicated story". Leon Panetta, a former White House chief of staff, is among trusted former aides who have voiced their frustration at the president's behaviour more bluntly, publicly urging Clinton to explain his relationship with Lewinsky. "Obviously there was something more here," said Panetta. "At some point he's got to tell the American people the truth." The cruellest blow to Clinton, however, has been the defection of George Stephanopoulos, the former aide and presidential spokesman who once spent more time than anyone at the president's side. Now working as a political pundit for ABC television, Stephanopoulos fuelled the initial furore over the scandal by raising the possibility of Clinton being impeached if proved to have lied. The president is eager to avoid the embarrassment of giving evidence about his sex life under oath after the humiliation he faced last month when he was questioned by lawyers representing Paula Jones, who accuses him in a separate case of dropping his trousers in a hotel room in 1991. Ambushed with questions about Lewinsky, Clinton said he did not recall having been alone with her. Sticking to this story in testimony to Starr may tax the patience of prosecutors who could confront him with conflicting testimony from other witnesses and accuse him of perjury. If Clinton receives a summons from Starr, his lawyers plan to argue that a sitting president cannot be forced to comply. The drawback to this is that it might make him look guilty. sunday-times.co.uk