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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (5009)	9/23/1998 3:04:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Yes, Clinton is in legal jeopardy, because of the firestorm of attention this hysteria has brought. As an ordinary citizen, he never would be. I consider his misleading statements in the Jones deposition that may turn out to be perjury far less serious than perjury ordinarily would be for two main reasons. His testimony on Lewinsky wasn't, or shouldn't, be judged material. And the frivolous Jones suit was a political set up, rather than any genuine quest for justice to remedy grievous wrongs. (She couldn't demonstrate any damages whatsoever. Which is why the suit was dismissed.) I think the Lewinsky testimony should be judged not material to the Jones complaint. It essentially was, in different words, when the judge threw out that testimony as not "necessary" for determining the Jones suit. If it wasn't "necessary" to fairly determine whether she had been sexually harassed, how could it be material? (The judge was simply continuing to put off making the materiality determination. Perhaps because she wanted to avoid setting precedent.) And even if the judge hadn't reached that opinion, I strongly believe that the President's Lewinsky testimony should not properly have affected Jones's ability to get true justice. That is, if the evidence of the President's adultery with a most eager participant had any impact, it would very likely have been of a prejudicial nature. (Especially with the priggish. Along the lines, of -- if that cadd could sin by committing adultery, he might also have forced himself on an unwilling victim -- or even raped her. Absurd.) That is a good lot of what is reflected in the public's view that lying about his private consensual sex life even in a lawsuit isn't all that serious. As I have said before, if somehow the President's sex lies really could have sent someone to jail, or even truly denied some litigant with the justice they deserved, I think the public would feel quite differently. They know the Jones suit was being used as a setup, and it affects how gravely they view the Presidents efforts, successful or not, to mislead and lie about Lewinsky while trying not to break the law. They know full well he was trying to get over. And also don't think under all the circumstances it was all that serious. And they think the media are in a feeding frenzy and many Republicans are zealots. The main reason the public mood MIGHT change its view on Clinton is an overriding sense that me must get past this crisis, soon, one way or another. That's what the higher resign than impeach numbers are about. That could grow as this stretches out. On the other hand the public ire could turn on Republicans for stretching out the impeachment process, if that's what they do It's hard to predict. It could go either way. Doug