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 : Should Clinton resign? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (279)	9/14/1998 3:04:00 PM
From: dougjn	Respond to of 567

Lot's of hatred in your tone, isn't there? Well, let me touch on something else: <<it would deal a heavy blow to the rule of law in this country and to respect for the law if the President of the Unites States, the Chief Law Enforcement Officer, can systematically and continually violate the law.>> Yes, that pretty well encapsulates the emotional difference between those who are distressed by what the President did, but think he should stay because at the bottom his illegality was pretty minor, and those who insist that it is crucial for the rule of law and moral fabric of the country that he go. Those of us in the first camp think the country's resect for the rule of law is in no danger whatsoever over this. (If we really were talking about Presidential behavior which could be reasonably described as "systematically and continually violating the law", that would be another matter entirely, of course.) On the facts before us it was the most minor instance of perjury imaginable. Perjury would ordinarily be impeachable. But not perjury about this subject, under these circumstances. What's behind the sex lies phrase is the manifest smallness of this perjury. And no, not all perjury is the same. Not by a long shot Though some search for moral absolutes, there are few, and the world is not black and white. Why was this the most minor, and forgivable, of all imaginable perjury? The subject he covered up was legal and consensual sex. The questions he falsely answered were asked by attorneys funded and guided (in a suit that may have been concocted) by his zealous political enemies who were trying to bring him down. They used the vehicle of a sexual harassment lawsuit, to seek to expose to extensive and lasting media coverage through illegal leaks, normally off limits private and consensual sexual activity of the President. For Clinton to answer fully truthfully would have been deeply damaging to his political career, but made no difference in the case at hand. Because the line of questions concerning Lewinsky was subsequently ruled not material to the unwanted advances alleged by Jones in her paid for lawsuit. The vehicle his enemies used to elicit this perjury was a frivolous lawsuit that was then dismissed for failure to show any damages. (The truth, or not, of her charges were never even reached.) It wasn't just luck for the President that his testimony ended up addressing immaterial questions in a frivolous suit. He knew full well his enemies were using the Jones suit to trap him when he answered. So what he did was to try to avoid perjury, but also avoid revealing his private affair, through convoluted word games. He tried mightily to deceive, but to not quite commit perjury. Whether or not he succeed, I don't know. I doubt it. So yes, in all the circumstances this was the most minor commission of perjury that I can imagine. All of this in a general way the American people know. They know his enemies were trying to trap him in the Jones suit. They know that's where the perjury was. They know it was only about adultery. They're not comfortable with their President doing anything illegal, but they don't buy it that the illegality was all that serious. They are more concerned with the adulterous conduct. And I think more concerned still that his sexual conduct has become the endless focus of discussion for months past and months to come. They don't blame Clinton the most for this. They blame an obsessed and unbalanced prosecutor, Starr. They certainly blame the media. And before very long, if Republicans are not careful, they are going to blame the Republican Congress. Who unlike the other two, they can do something about. Why? Because it really does feel like an inquisition. The rest of the world thinks our country is suffering this deep crisis not so much because of Clinton's commonplace and banal affair, but because of our absurd obsession with an affair in high places, and our silly desire for full religious purity in our secular head of state. I say read some history. About places other than puritan New England from 1640 - 1700 or so. Let's put things in perspective. The republic will not fall, and the murder and penny stock fraud rates won't go up if a President who has covered up an affair remains in office, but is humiliated for his transgression. Have you noticed that William Safire, who was early in pushing hard for special counsels to investigate Clinton in the Whitewater and Filegate matters, and still wonders if there is something there, is quite clear today in an editorial that Clinton should not be impeached for perjury limited to covering up a dalliance in the workplace. Judgement. A CBS poll out today indicates that 66% of Americans on Sunday said Clinton should stay in his job as President. Doug

To: Zoltan! who wrote (279)	9/14/1998 4:38:00 PM
From: dougjn	Respond to of 567

<<Perjury committed by a president, however, may be one of the most serious forms of criminal conduct since it is the crime that shields all other criminal acts from the public.>> (You, quoting the very prim Prof. Johnathan Turley.) If Clinton's perjury had in fact been shielding other criminal acts from the public I would consider it a much more serious matter, probably deserving of impeachment. The point is that it wasn't that at all, though that is of course what perjury often is, and the image the charge conjures up. What, by the way, do you make of the market's relief rally. It began as soon as word came out that the Starr report was being released within hours, as the market realized the extensive just before spin leaking had to come from Starr's office, and that there was nothing new. And therefore nothing all that horrible. Doug