Replies

This is a nice summary by Bartlett -- a deserved slicing of Sydney Blumenthal's contemptible "accounting" of all these events. Just reading Barlett's piece shows the difficulty related to getting the Clinton's the CONVICTIONS they deserved in all these matters: the eyes glaze over, the dates all overlap, and one loses the ability to sequence all these matters.

The one that most galls me: Bartlett properly focuses on the $850,000 judgment against Clinton by Judge Susan Webber Wright tied to his lying in the Paula Jones matter (denying sexual relations with Monica... "depends on what the definition of 'is' is" and Clinton's tortured belief that what he did didn't meet Judge Wright's definition). What Bartlett fails to note in this account: the original dismissal of that case (news of which resulted in Clinton banging the bongoes in front of FoxNews cameras -- no other media outlet showed those videos) was the reason that one of the 4 impeachment counts was not moved by the House. Lindsay Graham noted that Clinton's perjury in the Paula Jones deposition "was a moot point" because the case had been dismissed by Judge Wright (who decided not to review the matter until after the Impeachment proceedings).

So Clinton only gets impeached on 2 counts instead of 3 or 4. And then AFTER THE IMPEACHMENT, Wright makes a summary ruling in favor of Paula Jones ($850,000 + $90,000 legal fees)... I guess, in Judge Wright's mind, this was sufficient punishment for a lying, rapist President who could pay that fine with his legal defense funds petty cash account. This "delay in judgment" by Judge Wright was just a little service to her former U. of Ark. professor.

Timing was everything to the Clintons... Remember Hillary's appearance -- was if before the grand jury or just a deposition, it's so hard to remember -- after so many delays and stonewalling. Well, about 2 weeks after this appearance, the long-missing billing records were suddenly found in the First Family's private quarters in the White House by an aide... Now those billing records would have been useful for that Grand Jury appearance but they just weren't available, were they... And we wouldn't want the First Lady to be forced to testify again.

It sounds like Sydney's account ignores the $850,000 "inconvenience"... I'm sure he makes the best account for Mrs. Clinton's lying and cheating.

As I've said in many FREEP threads: it will take decades and generations to clean "Clintonism" out of the body politic of this country -- that's their true everlasting legacy.

Speaking of "ones that got away", remember when Clinton testified (by videotape) in U.S. v. McDougal? He was asked point blank during examination whether he had ever received loans from Madison Guaranty. Clinton testified that he hadn't -- which McDougal immediately recognized this testimony a lie, even though Clinton had no need to do so. Later, Starr's OIC found those papers in a car trunk in Little Rock, some of which proved that Clinton had gotten loans from Madison. In other words, Clitnon committed perjury in federal court, as President. And Ken Starr had the evidence that he did. Oh yes, this happened two years before Jones v. Clinton.

This exchange is discussed in an ancient FR thread, from the misty reaches of time, From Beyond the Grave: McDougal Speaks!.