🚀 go-pugleaf

Or how about you take yourself to:

larrymcwhiney.byhimself.alone

Then you'll only see the content you like ...




> Yes, and why not take it to co.politics in its entirety?  Thanks.
> 
> James, Dave G wrote in message
> <47D861E4FA1DD2118D6500104B2C314B0789D1@dvs1.nolte.com>...
> >This article appeared on MSNBC's Web site today - I have put it here in
> >its entirety.
> >************************************************************************
> >************************
> >Double standard
> >for perjurors
> >
> >
> >A serious offense for some, but
> >if you're the president, not a problem
> >
> >
> >By Deroy Murdock
> >MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR
> >
> >
> >
> >NEW YORK, Nov. 30 -  Perjury is the issue before the House Judiciary
> >Committee this week, as it receives testimony from two Americans who
> >have suffered federal detention for lying about sex under oath in civil
> >cases. President Clinton's defenders have claimed that prosecutors,
> >judges and juries tend to wink at such misbehavior. Barbara Battalino
> >and Pam Parsons would beg to differ.
> >
> > The experiences of four women convicted of lying under oath belie the
> >Clintonite argument that perjury is no big deal, especially about sex.
> >
> >         IN A CASE with eerie parallels to the Monica Lewinsky scandal,
> >Veterans Administration psychiatrist Barbara Battalino was prosecuted
> >for denying that she performed oral sex on Vietnam veteran Edward I.
> >Arthur on June 27, 1991. He was one of her patients who later sued her
> >for sexual harassment and medical malpractice. Arthur happened to
> >audiotape some 25 hours of phone conversations with Battalino, including
> >one in which she scolded him for discussing the time they played doctor
> >before their medical relationship had ended. As Battalino said: "the
> >thing was that we were supposed to not have had sex until after...I
> >can't believe you would divulge that."
> >
> >OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE
> >       Using these tapes, the Justice Department charged Battalino last
> >April with endeavoring "to influence, obstruct and impede the due
> >administration of justice in connection with a pending proceeding before
> >a court of the United States," namely the lawsuit in which Battalino
> >falsely denied having sex with Edward Arthur in her federal office.
> >       Oddly enough, no claque of Battalino groupies chanted, "So what
> >if she lied under oath? She's a great shrink." Instead, she pled guilty
> >and is suffering the consequences of her misdeeds. Last July, she was
> >fined $3,500 and sentenced to a year's probation, including six months
> >of house arrest monitored by electronic bracelet. She also was removed
> >from her federal job. "I don't have the ability anymore to practice
> >medicine," she told Matt Lauer on the Today show. "I have a law degree I
> >cannot use...It's been very disturbing for myself and my family."
> >       Battalino is not alone. Former University of South Carolina
> >basketball coach Pam Parsons filed a $75 million civil suit against
> >Time, Inc. - publisher of Sports Illustrated - after the magazine
> >alleged in February, 1982 that she had sex with a woman's basketball
> >player she coached. In a sworn deposition, Parsons falsely denied a
> >sexual relationship with the athlete. After Time won the case, Parsons
> >was prosecuted for perjury. In 1985, she and her lover were sentenced to
> >four months in a minimum-security prison.
> >       In yet another case of perjury - one that won't be heard in
> >Tuesday's hearings - former postal worker Diane Parker falsely denied
> >taking a personal trip with Kevin Collins, a subordinate who sued the
> >Postal Service in 1992, claiming she had sexually harassed him. After
> >Collins won his case, Parker's false witness in a related civil
> >deposition bought her a 13-month jail sentence. "It's sad," she lamented
> >in a Marianna, Fla., federal prison. "Everything you work for is gone,"
> >she added, including the house she surrendered to her creditors.
> >       The experiences of these four women belie the Clintonite argument
> >that perjury is no big deal, especially about sex. They lied under oath
> >about sex in civil cases and were condemned to between four and 13
> >months in federal detention. Meanwhile, the cognoscenti demand that
> >President Clinton avoid the same punishment for allegedly committing the
> >same crime. The American people insist that their Rogue-in-Chief walk
> >away. And, like a chorus line of Rockettes, America's feminists
> >high-kick in agreement. Where is the justice? Where is the outrage?
> >
> >WHY BOTHER TO TELL THE TRUTH?
> > Oddly enough, no claque of Battalino groupies chanted, "So what if she
> >lied under oath? She's a great shrink." Instead, she pled guilty and is
> >suffering the consequences of her misdeeds.
> >
> >         This double standard only would make sense if Bill Clinton were
> >crowned King William I and allowed to serve for life in the re-named
> >Royal Palace on Pennsylvania Avenue. Does America deserve a monarchy in
> >which sovereign immunity would shield rulers from the laws used to jail
> >their subjects? Conversely, if President Clinton gets away with
> >perjuring himself in a sexual harassment case and before a federal
> >criminal grand jury, why should Americans bother to tell the truth in
> >divorce, paternity and harassment cases? After all, they're often just
> >about sex.
> >       Judiciary Committee members should consider these questions
> >before they vote on articles of impeachment against President Clinton,
> >most likely in mid-December. The President's evasive, often
> >hair-splitting answers to 81 questions posed by the Committee apparently
> >have emboldened Judiciary Republicans whose support for impeachment
> >language has wavered. While some Democrats, such as William Delahunt (D
> >- Mass.) are promoting a censure motion, Republicans look dimly on such
> >a wrist-slap in the absence of an admission of legal deceit by the
> >President. Even Virginia Democrat Jim Moran was disappointed by
> >President Clinton's written responses, released the day after
> >Thanksgiving. "Twenty-two times he said he doesn't recall," Moran told
> >NBC Nightly News. "Well, the President has a bear-trap memory. But, you
> >know, reading these answers, you'd think he's suffering from
> >Alzheimer's."
> >       The opposition of some Republicans makes the eventual impeachment
> >of Bill Clinton unlikely by the full House, for now. If articles of
> >impeachment simply emerge from the Judiciary Committee, Bill Clinton
> >will have suffered an official punishment equal to that of President
> >Nixon. In August, 1974, the Committee approved articles of impeachment.
> >Within two weeks, Richard Milhous Nixon spared America further grief and
> >resigned.
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >--------
> >Deroy Murdock is a marketing and media consultant and a contributor to
> >MSNBC.
> >
> >
> 
> 
>