[Rhodes22-list] Politics -- Question

[Bill Effros]

Brad,

I really, really, hope this question will not degenerate into the question "If Clinton lied about a blow job, is it OK for Bush to lie about a war?"

Have you ever read the Clinton Grand Jury testimony?

Most people have not.  I think you'll find it quite interesting.

First of all, everyone was lying.  They had quite a cast of characters.   People couldn't remember if they were fired from their last job.  They couldn't remember accusations made against them.  etc.

Then Clinton gets asked a sex question with no direct bearing on the matter at hand.  His attorneys object.  The question is rephrased in the negative.  It is so convoluted that it is written down and handed to Clinton who is asked if he understands the question.  He says he thinks he does.  He is told to answer yes or no.  His lawyers again object, telling the judge it has become the "Do you still beat your wife?" question--Clinton will be accused of lying no matter how he answers the question.  The judge insists that he answer the question.

The question permitted was "Have you had intercourse with Monica Lewinski?"  To which, it would seem, Clinton could have honestly answered "no".  The question asked was "Have you had sex with Monica Lewinski?" with a paragraph long definition of "sex" that explicitly excluded, for the purpose of this answer in this court at this time, blow jobs among other things.  Clinton seemingly truthfully answered "no".  

This was a set up, and I think you know it.  The testimony was never supposed to become public, but of course it did.  If you look at his public statements around this time, for a while he was able to tap dance around the truth, saying, truthfully, things like "Under the definition of sex as provided to me in my Grand Jury testimony I can honestly say that I never had sex with Monica Lewinski..."

Then he got sloppy and started to rely on implied disclaimers.  I will not, for one moment, try to defend this.  It was dumb.  It was dumb to get backed into this situation.  Knowing what he knew, he would have been smarter to settle earlier, even if he knew the charges against him amounted to extortion, and would lead to more frivolous suits.

To answer my own question: no, I do not think it is OK to lie about blow jobs.  I do not think it is ok to lie about war.  I do think you agree.  

Bill Effros
----- Original Message ----- 
From: brad haslett 
To: The Rhodes 22 mail list 
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 7:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Politics -- Question


Here's a link to a Rich Lowry column that addresses
your issue.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/richlowry/rl20030603.shtml

Here's a link to a letter written to President Clinton
from the authors of the Iraqi Liberation Act. Written
by the Senators who authored the bill from both
parties I might add.

http://www.nci.org/c/c81199.htm

Here's a link to a Washington columnist on the issue.

Tihttp://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20030603-084008-8562r.htmmes


You don't like Bush, fine!  Don't vote for him.  But,
may I politely suggest that before you jump to the
conclusion that he somehow lied, do some homework. 
Just because Clinton could look straight faced into
the camera and lie (remember he was impeached for it
and lost his license to practice law) doesn't mean
everyone is so careless with the truth.

Brad



--- FNuttersNY at aol.com wrote:
> We do no this,  we were lied to AGAIN by those  in
> powere who have their own 
> agenda and are hell bent to carry it out
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
www.rhodes22.org/list


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list