Whoopee! Moveon.org, the organization that was started to protect Bill Clinton from the consequences of lying to a Grand Jury, is on the warpath to promote the idea that lying to a Grand Jury really is a big deal after all. So what’s going to be more fun, liberals changing their tune about lying, or … Continue reading “Now the fun starts”
Whoopee! Moveon.org, the organization that was started to protect Bill Clinton from the consequences of lying to a Grand Jury, is on the warpath to promote the idea that lying to a Grand Jury really is a big deal after all.
So what’s going to be more fun, liberals changing their tune about lying, or conservatives changing theirs? We’ll see.
Comments are closed.
Umm…Bill Clinton didn’t commit perjury.
Actually, he did and he paid a fine for it; it was plea-bargained to “contempt of court”. The fine was $800,000, and he lost his law license for it.
But it was no big deal.
No, it wasn’t. Perjury requires materiality, and I still – after all these years- can’t figure out what a semen stained dress has to do with a real estate deal.
Do you know what spinning a reporter has to do with an undercover CIA operation? About the same thing.
Did Clinton pay an $800,000 fine (yes or no)?
Did he lose his license to practice law in Arkansas (yes or no)?
Why?
Can you prove perjury beyond a reasonable doubt?
Did the Senate not find Clinton not guilty (requiring “clear and convincing” evidence)?
Unless you can answer those questions, your questions are immaterial, irrelevant, and therefore, inadmissible in any court that would consider such a case.
In case you didn’t notice, Mumsie, this isn’t a court, it’s a blog, and you aren’t a lawyer, you’re a standards geek.
Clinton lied, did he not? And Valerie Plame gave Joe Wilson blow jobs, did she not?
So it’s the same thing all over again.
… it’s a blog, and you aren’t a lawyer, you’re a standards geek…
Not any more, heh heh. I’ve moved on to better things. Much better things.
But all lying is not alas for you is not perjury.
But you’ll have to ask Joe Wilson what he and his wife do in private.
Actually the national review editorial today supported the prosecutor.
“Please spare us the excuses warmed over from Democratic talking points in the 1990s: the prosecutor is out-of-control, there was no underlying crime, etc., etc. It is the responsibility of anyone, especially a public official, to tell the truth to FBI agents and grand juries. If Libby didn’t, he should face the consequences.”
Yes, conservatives have been much more consistent on this than liberals. The prosecutor has essentially cleared Rove and Cheney of any wrongdoing, and that’s good.
And we didn’t use the term “perjury”, Mumsie, we said “lying”.
Incidentally, Clinton was indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice, just like Libby. But since Clinton wasn’t prosecuted in a court of law, we can’t go apples-to-apples between him and Libby.
Seems that MoveOn.org can’t seem to move on… though they did try to flirt with Sheehan and pacificism…
Still … trying to see what the serious concerns were:
Clinton – setting himself up for a classic honeytrap and extortion, then lies and tries to cover up his affair so puts himself as the most powerful leader in a position to be more vulnerable to extortion (since he is hiding his affair and more desperate to keep it a secret).
Libby: Exposing a CIA operative who hadn’t been undercover for years (an in Europe no less) and this ‘secret’ was hardly secret? Sure – if he used his position of power in order to ruin her because of her political views – then he is a jerk that deserves what he gets.