Two, four, six, eight!
Do you appreciate --
Free Republic?
The longer the FReepathon lasts, the longer you'll see me! Oh the horror! Donate now. Do it 'for the children.'
Posted on 03/06/2002 8:03:51 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:39:49 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A final report by Independent Counsel Robert Ray concluded Wednesday that prosecutors had ample evidence for criminal charges against President Clinton in the scandal involving former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
"The independent counsel's judgment that sufficient evidence existed to prosecute President Clinton was confirmed by President Clinton's admissions," the report stated. "President Clinton admitted he `knowingly gave evasive and misleading answers"' about his sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
In response to the report, Clinton attorney David Kendall issued a brief statement: "The investigation of President Clinton from 1994 to 2001 was intense, expensive, partisan and long. There's still no Whitewater report, and there's nothing new in this report. It's time to move on."
The criminal investigation of Clinton in the Lewinsky matter began in January 1998. Former White House employee Linda Tripp, a friend of Lewinsky, turned over to Starr secretly taped phone calls in which the ex-intern confided her relationship with Clinton. The tapes contradicted Clinton's sworn testimony in the Jones case, which the president gave just days after Tripp had turned the tapes over to Starr.
The sequence -- first turning over the tapes, then Clinton testifying in the Jones case -- led Clinton and his defenders to accuse Starr's office of setting a perjury trap for the president.
Starr's prosecutors and the FBI looked into whether Clinton had tried to silence Lewinsky by getting presidential friend Vernon Jordan to find a job for her. Besides opening doors for her job-hunting efforts, Jordan arranged to hire a Washington lawyer for Lewinsky so that she could file an affidavit in the Jones case. In the affidavit, she denied having had a sexual relationship with Clinton.
When Lewinsky eventually agreed to cooperate with investigators in the summer of 1998, she turned over a stained blue dress from an encounter with Clinton, making it impossible for the president to deny a sexual relationship. Lab tests showed Clinton's DNA on the garment.
How would You Feel without FR??? Suppose one day you tried to log on and Free Republic wasn’t there?
Where would you get your up to the minute news? How about the live threads as things are happening?
How would you know about the latest Demorat scams, anti-second amendment schemes and all the other liberal, anti-American ploys that are tried every single day?
Insight into world affairs, brilliant wit, sharp retorts, instant information gratification are a few of the things that make FR so vital.
How would you keep on top of things without FR?
How would you know who to contact to complain about the lying politicians, Media Bias, Hollyweirds latest mouth off, sponsors of these idiots, company policies that are unfair and all the other things we need to know to counteract the liberal mindset and the evil plans of liberals?
How would you be part of a Freep?
What would you do without FR????
Freedom isn’t free.
If you enjoy the site and find it a place of like minded Americans to sound off, to get together,
to fight back, to have your voice heard and make a difference, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE NOW! Jim can’t do this alone.
The liberals are sure we won’t be able to keep FR up & running. Prove them wrong. Show them we are indeed united Freepers.
Whether it is $5.00, $50.00 or more, it all adds up. Please send a donation now to Free Republic.
The longer the FReepathon lasts, the longer you'll see me! Oh the horror! Donate now. Do it 'for the children.'
More than four years after the allegations first emerged that Clinton sought to hide his affair with Lewinsky, a special U.S. appeals court released a lengthy report by independent counsel Robert Ray that was required by law.
"The independent counsel concluded that sufficient evidence existed to prosecute and that such evidence would 'probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction ... by an unbiased trier of fact'," he said in the report.
But Ray said he decided against prosecution on the grounds that "noncriminal alternatives" were sufficient.
Right before he left office in January 2001 Clinton admitted knowingly giving false, evasive statements in a deal with Ray that ended the investigation without any criminal charges being brought.
Today, acting on the May 18, 2001 application of the Independent Counsel, the Special Division of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously ordered the public release of the Final Report of the Independent Counsel (In re: Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan Association, Div. No. 94-1 (D.C. Cir. [Spec. Div.] Jan. 16, 1998) (regarding Monica Lewinsky and others). The report also disclosed publicly for the first time that the final report related to Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan Association has been completed and was filed with the Special Division in March of last year. Under the Independent Counsel statute, a report filed with the Special Division remains under seal until such time, if at all, the Special Division authorizes its public release.
The public release of the Final Report (regarding Monica Lewinsky and others) is the culmination of this Office's orderly procedure initiated by our January 19, 2001 announcement of the conclusion of the investigation and simultaneous determination not to prosecute President William J. Clinton (the press release and other information related to this decision also can be reached as a link from this Office's web site www.oicray.com). The Independent Counsel decided to exercise his discretion, consistent with the principles of federal prosecution, to decline prosecution of all matters within the January 16, 1998 jurisdictional mandate of the Special Division of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The evidence and analysis contained in the now unsealed Final Report formed the basis for the determination on January 19, 2001, that the investigation should be closed without bringing criminal charges.
On his last full day in office, President Clinton admitted to intentional misconduct and entered into an Agreed Order of Discipline, acknowledging to an Arkansas court that he had knowingly provided evasive and misleading answers about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Those answers were given in a deposition presided over by Judge Susan Webber Wright of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas in the Jones v. Clinton case, who personally administered the oath to President Clinton. Three years after President Clinton testified in that deposition, he admitted that his knowingly evasive and misleading answers were prejudicial to the administration of justice and expressly acknowledged that some of his responses to deposition questions about Lewinsky were false.
In the Independent Counsel's judgment, there was sufficient evidence to prosecute President Clinton for violating federal criminal laws within this Office's jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the Independent Counsel concluded, consistent with the Principles of Federal Prosecution, that further proceedings against President Clinton for his conduct should not be initiated. That decision was supported by:
(1) President Clinton's admission of providing false testimony that was knowingly misleading, evasive, and prejudicial to the administration of justice before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas;
(2) his acknowledgement that his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Arkansas Supreme Court;
(3) the five-year suspension of his license to practice law and $25,000 fine imposed on him by the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Arkansas;
(4) the civil contempt penalty of more than $90,000 imposed on President Clinton by the federal court for violating its orders;
(5) the payment of more than $850,000 in settlement to Paula Jones;
(6) the express finding by the federal court that President Clinton had engaged in contemptuous conduct; and
(7) the substantial public condemnation of President Clinton arising from his impeachment.
Over the course of this investigation, this Office faced numerous challenges to its professional integrity and the lawful exercise of its authority. These allegations of professional and other misconduct and the claims of a right to withhold evidence ultimately were rejected. These allegations and other tactics had a substantial impact on the prompt completion of this Office's work, delaying in some cases for months access to available evidence. Responding to these allegations and claims also increased substantially the expense of this investigation,(1) but it was essential to do so in order for the Independent Counsel to fulfill the mandates sought by the Attorney General and conferred by the Special Division.
The release of this Report reflects the final stage to completing the investigation in a prompt, responsible, and cost effective manner. The Final Report In re: Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan Association, Div. No. 94-1 (D.C. Cir. [Spec. Div.] Jan. 16, 1998) (regarding Monica Lewinsky and others) is available today at the main U.S. Government Bookstore at 710 North Capitol Street, N.W. in Washington, D.C. and online from GPO Access http://icreport.access.gpo.gov, which also can be reached as a link from this Office's web site www.oicray.com.
1 From August 5, 1994 through December 31, 2001, this Office incurred total expenses of approximately $70 million (an arithmetic error appears on page 143 of the report; the direct costs should total $48,149,096). This figure includes approximately $17 million (26%) in costs incurred by federal agencies, but not reimbursed by this Office, whose personnel were detailed to this Office. The investigation regarding Monica Lewinsky and others incurred expenses of approximately $12.5 million.
And he didn't prosecute him because.........
Click on my name and ask yourself why the democrats in the Senate seemed unable to convict the guy.
Right about the time the Clintons are probably hoping they'll be in the White House again, this time with Hillary at the helm.
I could have told them this in 1999.......and I wouldn't have charged the U.S. taxpayer near as much money. Typical government investigation (research), large sums of money spent and little end result.
Actually, I wish there was/is more being done to bring the Clintons to justice. But I will savor this small victory.
March 1, 2002
The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
United States House of Representatives
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-6216
Dear Congressman Conyers:
Based upon our previous professional relationship, I was disappointed to learn that you had released correspondence addressed to me to the media prior to my receiving said correspondence or notice of your intent to do so. Therefore, it is with some degree of difficulty that I accept the sincerity of your "serious concern" about published reports regarding what you characterize as "partisan political activity" by me. But I respect the spirit of that concern nonetheless based upon your position as a member of one of the committees that has oversight jurisdiction over my office and our previous cordial relationship.
It has not been the practice of my office to respond to individual members of Congress. The oversight jurisdiction that originates with the Independent Counsel statute has been recognized on a bipartisan basis as emanating not from individual members of the committees with oversight jurisdiction, but by the action of the committee itself. See 28 U.S.C. § 595(a)(1). That typically is communicated to my office through the Chairman of the respective committee. This has not occurred here.
You have chosen to release your two letters -- the first to me and the second to the Special Division -- directly to the media even before they were received in my office. Because you further have variously accused me (without foundation and without waiting for my response) of "apparent violations of the law," "apparent violation of the Independent Counsel Act," "reckless disregard of [my] duties under the Hatch Act," and a "clear cut example of law breaking," I am now compelled to respond.
As a career prosecutor, I have been scrupulous, and will continue to be scrupulous as long as I continue to serve as Independent Counsel, in conforming my conduct to the letter and spirit of the Hatch Act.
That said, I am well aware of the strictures of the Independent Counsel statute. That now lapsed statute, however, says nothing about prohibited political activity. Only the Hatch Act so provides, and it is not at all clear that the Hatch Act applies to an Independent Counsel. While I am bound by the Department of Justice policies included, among other places, in the United States Attorneys' Manual, I am bound only by those policies "respecting enforcement of the criminal laws." 28 U.S.C. § 594(f)(1). Moreover, I may be removed from office only for "good cause" and only upon the personal action of the Attorney General, not by operation of the Hatch Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 596(a)(1).
You overlook the fact that I am not now a candidate or running to be a candidate for partisan political office. I have not filed as a candidate or as a nominee. I have not sought or solicited campaign contributions, raised money or sought or received endorsements. In short, there is currently no campaign for office of which I am a participant whatsoever. Accordingly, none of the provisions of the Hatch Act, Department of Justice regulations nor the United States Attorneys' Manual that you cite have been violated by me, either in letter or in spirit.
What I have done is attend a Lincoln Day dinner sponsored by the Monmouth County Republicans on February 10, 2002. I gave a speech principally honoring President Abraham Lincoln's birthday because I was asked to do so. (A copy of my prepared remarks that evening is attached). I did not appear "in support of or in opposition" to any candidate, whether myself or anyone else. See 5 C.F.R. §§ 734.409(d). I was invited to speak as a resident of Monmouth County and not as a candidate for office. I paid for my ticket and that of my spouse, who also attended. The Department of Justice guidelines on the subject, which I consulted before the event, are clear that the Hatch Act expressly permits attendance at political events, including fundraisers, and permits me to speak at such events. To the extent that the payment for two tickets to the event was, in part, a political contribution, I am expressly permitted to have done so. As to the portion of my remarks in which I said that what we need in the United States Senate is "principled, ethical and trustworthy leadership," I assume that no one, including you, would disagree with that sentiment.
In short, while you appear anxious to accuse me of violating the law, your accusation is completely without foundation. It is equally distressing to me that you would make use of unsupported allegations of prosecutorial misconduct to undermine the now nearly completed work of the Office of the Independent Counsel. As you well know, I have tried mightily to restore the country's confidence in the integrity of law enforcement and law enforcement officials. As you have told me yourself, my prosecutorial decisions and the conduct of my office have never been about partisanship. Allegations made are never as easily answered even when they do not withstand scrutiny. I would have appreciated the courtesy of a meaningful opportunity to respond before being compelled to embark on the precipitous course you have chosen here.
Returning, however, to your legitimate concern, I assure you that I will not engage in prohibited partisan activity while I am serving as Independent Counsel. I well understand the propriety of resigning my current office should I decide to become a candidate for elective office. In any event, I intend to fulfill my responsibilities by bringing the work of our office to substantial conclusion before undertaking any other course.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Ray
Independent Counsel
The unpleasant fact that we all tend to forget is that convicting Clinton was probably impossible. It would have required a jury of all Republicans or truly unbiased independents, because we know a Democrat would never vote to convict him. Of course, getting a jury like that would never have been permitted.
A prosecution of Clinton would have dragged on for months and would have resulted, at best, in a hung jury. That's the reality, and I understand a decision that this wouldn't have been in the best interests of the country.
Especially in light of the closeness of the election, it's hard to estimate how much worse this would have made the political climate in Washington.
You are so correct. Wanna bet this story is GONE within 48 hours?
Well Mr. Clinton, we will not forget at FreeRepublic.
TABLE A
INDICTMENTS, PROSECUTIONS AND CONVICTIONS
| 1. David Hale | Indictment 9/23/93 Superseding Indictment 2/17/94 Superseding Information 3/22/94 |
Four Felony Counts: Conspiracy; False Statements. Four Felony Counts: Conspiracy; False Statements. Two Felony Counts: Conspiracy; Mail Fraud. |
Guilty Plea on 3/22/94. Sentenced 3/25/96: 28 months imprisonment; 3 years supervised release; $10,000 fine; restitution $2,040,000; $100 special assessment (2/6/98 -- sentence reduced to time served and fine abated). |
| 2. Charles Matthews | Indicted 9/23/93 Superseding Indictment 2/17/94 Superseding Information 6/23/94 |
Two Felony Counts: Conspiracy. One Felony Count: Conspiracy. Two Misdemeanor Counts: Bribery. |
Guilty Plea on 6/23/94. Sentenced 1/3/95: 16 months imprisonment; one year of supervised release; $7,500 fine; $25 special assessment. |
| 3. Eugene Fitzhugh | Indicted 9/23/93 Superseding Indictment 2/17/94 Superseding Information 6/23/94 |
Two Felony Counts: Conspiracy. One Felony Count: Conspiracy. One Misdemeanor Count: Bribery. |
Guilty Plea on 6/23/94. Sentenced 10/22/96: 10 months imprisonment - first five months in a halfway house or medical facility and final five months on home detention; 1 year supervised release; $3,000 fine; $25 special assessment. |
| 4. Robert W. Palmer | Information 12/5/94 | One Felony Count: Conspiracy. | Guilty Plea on 12/5/94. Sentenced 6/16/95: 3 years probation - first year home detention; $5,000 fine. |
| 5. Webster L. Hubbell | Information 12/6/94 | Two Felony Counts: Mail Fraud; Tax Evasion. | Guilty Plea on 12/6/94. Sentenced 6/23/95: 21 months imprisonment, followed by 3 years supervised release; restitution of $135,000; 48 hours of community service at ADC. |
| 6. Neal T. Ainley | Indictment 2/28/95 Superseding Information 5/2/95 |
Five Felony Counts: Conspiracy, Failure to File Currency Transaction Reports, False Entries, and False Statements. Two Misdemeanor Counts: Willfully delivering/disclosing fraudulent document. |
Guilty Plea on 5/2/95. Sentenced: 1/18/96; 2 years probation; first year 8 hours per week community service; $1,000 fine; $50 special assessment. |
| 7. Christopher V. Wade | Information 3/21/95 | Two Felony Counts: Bankruptcy Fraud/False Applications and Certifications to Financial Institution. | Guilty Plea on 3/21/95. Sentenced 12/1/95: 15 months imprisonment; 3 years supervisory release; $3,000 fine; $100 special assessment. |
| 8. William J. Marks, Sr. | Indictment 6/7/95 Superseding Information 8/28/97 |
Three Felony Counts: Conspiracy to Defraud SBA, False Statements, Conspiracy to Defraud IRS. One Felony Count: Conspiracy to Defraud U.S. |
Guilty Plea on 8/28/97. Sentenced 5/18/98: 4 years supervisory probation; 4 hours community service per week for 4 years; $1,000,000 restitution; $6,000 fine; $50 special assessment. |
| 9. Jim Guy Tucker | Indictment 6/7/95 Superseding Information 2/20/98 |
Three Felony Counts: Conspiracy to Defraud SBA, False Statements, Conspiracy to Defraud IRS. One Felony Count: Conspiracy to Defraud U.S. |
Guilty Plea on 2/20/98. Sentenced 5/17/99: restitution of $1,000,000; 4 years probation (4 hours per week of community service); fine of $6,000; $50 special assessment. On 7/3/00, the restitution was remanded to district court. On 12/1/00 resentencing was deferred. |
| 10. John Haley | Indictment 6/7/95 Superseding Information 2/20/98 |
One Felony Count: Conspiracy to Defraud IRS. One Misdemeanor Count: Aiding and Abetting Others in Willful Failure to Supply Information to IRS. |
Guilty Plea 2/20/98. Sentenced 8/20/98: 3 years supervised probation; 8 hours community service per week for 3 years; $40,000 restitution; $30,000 fine. |
| 11. Stephen A. Smith | Information 6/8/95 | One Misdemeanor Count: Conspiracy. | Guilty Plea on 6/8/95. Sentenced 7/12/96: One year probation; 100 hours community service; $1,000 fine; $25 special assessment. |
| 12. Larry Kuca | Information 7/13/95 | One Misdemeanor Count: Conspiracy. | Guilty Plea on 7/13/95. Sentenced 10/11/95: 2 years probation; 80 hours community service; restitution to SBA of $65,862; $25 special assessment. |
| 13. Jim Guy Tucker | Indictment 8/17/95 Trial 3/4/96 Verdict 5/28/96 |
Eleven Felony Counts: Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, Bank Fraud, Mail Fraud, Misapplication of Funds, False Entries in SBA Reports, False Statements. | Guilty Verdict on two counts: Conspiracy and Mail Fraud (not guilty on Wire Fraud, Bank Fraud, and Misapplication of Funds). Sentenced 8/19/96: 4 years probation (18 months home detention); community service; restitution to SBA of $150,000 plus interest; $25,000 fine. On 2/23/98, 8th Circuit remanded for further hearing on juror misconduct issue. Denied by district court 2/17/99, affirmed by 8th Circuit on 2/27/01. Motion to vacate sentence filed 8/17/00. |
| 14. James B. McDougal | Indictment 8/17/95 Trial 3/4/96 Verdict 5/28/96 |
Nineteen Felony Counts: Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, Bank Fraud, Mail Fraud, Misapplication of Funds, False Statements, False Entries in SBA Report. | Guilty Verdict on eighteen counts (not guilty on one Mail Fraud charge). Sentenced 4/14/97: 3 years imprisonment; 3 years probation after prison (1st year home detention); restitution to SBA and FDIC, if able, of $4,274,301; $10,000 fine; $900 special assessment. Died on 3/8/98. /i> |
| 15. Susan H. McDougal | Indictment 8/17/95 Trial 3/4/96 Verdict 5/28/96 |
Eight Felony Counts: Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, Mail Fraud, False Entries in SBA Report, Misapplication of Funds, False Statements. | Guilty Verdict on four counts: Mail Fraud, Misapplication of Funds, False Entries in SBA Report, False Statements. Sentenced 8/20/96: 24 months imprisonment; 3 years probation following prison; 104 hours community service each year; $5,000 fine; restitution of $300,000 plus interest to SBA. Conviction affirmed; jailed on contempt of court charges 9/9/96. Appeal on contempt denied. Commenced sentence 3/8/98. Sentence reduced to time served 6/25/98. |
| 16. Webster L. Hubbell | Indictment 11/13/98 | Fifteen Felony Counts: Impede the FDIC & RTC; Fraud; False Statements to FDIC; False Statements to RTC; Perjury; Mail Fraud. | Guilty Plea to Count One entered 6/30/99, to scheme to conceal material facts from FDIC and RTC under 18 U.S.C.§ 1001. Sentenced to one year of probation; $100 special assessment. |
TABLE B
OTHER MATTERS NOT RESULTING IN CONVICTIONS
| 1. Herby Branscum, Jr. | Indictment 2/20/96 Trial 6/17-8/1/96 |
Eleven Felony Counts: Conspiracy; False Entries; Misapplication of Funds; False Statements. | Verdict: Not Guilty on Counts 2, 9, 10, and 11. Mistrial on Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Decision made 9/13/96 not to retry. |
| 2. Robert M. Hill | Indictment 2/20/96 Trial 6/17-8/1/96 |
Eleven Felony Counts: Conspiracy; False Entries; Misapplication of Funds; False Statements. | Verdict: Not Guilty on Counts 2, 9, 10, and 11. Mistrial on Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Decision made 9/13/96 not to retry. |
| 3. Webster L. Hubbell | Indictment 4/30/98 Superseding Information 6/30/99 |
Nine Felony Counts: Conspiracy; Impede and Impair IRS; Tax Evasion; Aid in Preparing a False Return; Mail Fraud; Wire Fraud. | Conditional guilty plea on 6/30/99 to misdemeanor tax charge pending review granted 10/12/99 by Supreme Court on scope of act of production immunity. On 6/5/00, the Supreme Court vacated the indictment. On 10/20/00, conditional plea and misdemeanor tax charge were vacated. |
| 4. Suzanna W. Hubbell | Indictment 4/30/98 | Eight Felony Counts: Conspiracy; Impede and Impair IRS; Tax Evasion; Mail Fraud; Wire Fraud. | Dismissed pursuant to Hubbell guilty plea on 6/30/99. |
| 5. Michael C. Schaufele | Indictment 4/30/98 | Nine Felony Counts: Conspiracy; Impede and Impair IRS; Tax Evasion; Aid in Preparing a False Tax Return; Mail Fraud; Wire Fraud. | Dismissed pursuant to Hubbell guilty plea on 6/30/99. |
| 6. Charles C. Owen | Indictment 4/30/98 | Nine Felony Counts: Conspiracy; Impede and Impair IRS; Tax Evasion; Mail Fraud; Wire Fraud. | Dismissed pursuant to Hubbell guilty plea on 6/30/99. |
| 7. Susan H. McDougal | Indictment 5/4/98 Trial 3/8-4/12/99 |
Three Felony Counts: Criminal Contempt (two counts); Obstruction of Justice. | Verdict 4/12/99: Not Guilty on Count Three (obstruction of justice); Hung jury on Counts One and Two (criminal contempt). Decision not to retry on 5/25/99. |
TABLE C
EXECUTIVE GRANTS OF CLEMENCY
| 1. Susan Henley McDougal | Full and Unconditional PardonJanuary 20, 2001 | For her conviction in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on an indictment (Docket No. LR-CR-95-3993) charging violation of Section 1341, Title 18, United States Code, Section 657, Title 18, United States Code, Section 1006, Title 18, United States Code, and Section 1014, Title 18, United States Code, for which she was sentenced on August 20, 1996, to twenty-four months in prison, three years probation following prison, one hundred and four hours of community service each year, a $5,000 fine, and restitution in the amount of $300,000 plus interest to the SBA. |
| 2. Robert William Palmer | Full and Unconditional PardonJanuary 20, 2001 | For his conviction in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on an information (Docket No. LR-CR-94-240) charging violation of Section 371, Title 18, United States Code, for which he was sentenced on June 16, 1995 to three years' probation and a fine of $5,000. |
| 3. Steven A. Smith | Full and Unconditional PardonJanuary 20, 2001 | For his conviction in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on an information (Docket No. LR-CR-95-118) charging violation of Section 371, Title 18, United States Code, for which he was sentenced to one year of probation and a fine of $1,000. |
| 4. Christopher V. Wade | Full and Unconditional PardonJanuary 20, 2001 | For his conviction in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on an information (Docket No. 4:95CR00048-1) charging violation of Sections 152 and 1014, Title 18, United States Code, for which he was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment, three years' supervised release, and a fine of $3,000. |
You're exactly right. Clinton lied under oath and then promoted the scandel as a diversion away from more serious scandel. From Jones to Loral, it was the perfect solution and Clinton got his jollies too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
