Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: All

I was in England when the Clinton hearings and trial were being conducted so only got biased media reports.

Would appreciate it if someone would please explain what the author meant by this:

"Clinton himself was convicted of perjury (THE OFFENSE THE DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE FAILED TO UPHOLD) by a federal judge,"

Thankyou.


19 posted on 01/01/2006 12:47:18 AM PST by AmeriBrit (The 'hildabeast' must be stopped. RELEASE THE BARRETT REPORT.....NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: AmeriBrit
Clinton was never convicted of perjury, because Special Prosecutor Ken Starr never filed charges when Clinton left office. He cited his impeachment acquittal. Of course during the impeachment trial the Dems argued that his perjury didn't "rise to the level of an impeachable offense" and that he could always be charged as a private citizen. Allegedly Starr told aides that he simply didn't believe he could get 12 jurors to convict Clinton.

However, since Clinton lied during a civil suit by Paula Jones, a civil (not criminal) charge was filed against Clinton in Arkansas an officer of the court. The judge in that case found Clinton had lied to the court and revoked license to practice law.
23 posted on 01/01/2006 2:25:17 AM PST by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson