🚀 go-pugleaf

Ron Conroy (rcconroy@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: Lloyd R. Parker wrote in message <768c0h$43d$1@curly.cc.emory.edu>...
: >Ron Conroy (rcconroy@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: >: Lloyd R. Parker wrote in message <763fk6$g5e$1@paladin.cc.emory.edu>...
: >: >Streek53 (streek53@mindspring.com) wrote:
: >: >: <<Clinton is a criminal, and more dangerous now than ever before.>>
: >: >:
: >: >: Yes, he's got nothing to lose. And everybody in the country knows he
: had
: >: a
: >: >: sexual affair with Monica...though he still won't admit this under
: oath.
: >: >
: >: >He has admitted he had sex with Monica.  Under oath, he denied he had
: >: >"sexual relations" with her as the term was defined to him then (meaning
: >: >intercourse, according to him).
: >:
: >:
: >: He has NEVER admitted to having "sex with Monica."  He did admit to
: having
: >: an "inappropriate relationship" with her, but that's all.
: >
: >No, he has admitted tom having sex with her.  Oral sex, which by his
: >interpretation of the definition of "sexual relations" given at the
: >deposition, didn't fall under that definition.  And Lewinsky testified
: >that she didn't believe oral sex constituted "sexual relations" either.
: 
: 
: Wrong, he has NEVER admitted to having "sex with Monica."  Once again, he

Sorry, not so.  You must have tuned out after day 1.

: did admit to having an "inappropriate relationship" with her.  As far as the
: definitions are concerned, they are irrelevant. 

No.  The attorney for PJ said, "for the purposes of this deposition,
sexual relations will be defined as..." and read 3 sections.  Clinton's
lawyer objected, and the judge threw out 2 of the sections.

:  In his grand jury
: testimony, clarification of the definitions may have been established, but
: he has never admitted to having "sex with Monica" forthright.  Furthermore,
: some of the censure proposals coming from the Senate suggest that Clinton
: would have to admit to his crimes of perjury and to his dishonesty about the
: relationship with Monica.  In other words, he will probably be forced to
: admit that he has "had sex with Monica" under oath in front of Congress.

He doesn't have a problem with this; what he's said he didn't do was
perjure himself, and his position so far is that he won't say he did.

Some GOP Senators are talking about a trial, vote, and then censure.  What
makes them think the president would accept censure if he's acquitted, or
that censure would matter if he's convicted?

: 
: >: Furthermore, it's a matter of law, not public opinion.  If you recall
: >: correctly, Nixon had 65-75% approval ratings before the House Judiciary
: >: Committee's vote.  Realizing that law would prevail, he resigned...
: >
: >Wrong!  Polls while the impeachment hearings were going on showed most
: >people wanted Nixon out.
: 
: 
: Wrong!  Nixon had strong support even on the day of his resignation.  Yes,
: as the hearings progressed, Nixon lost a great deal of support, but even on
: the days before his resignation, polls showed that only 40-45% of "the
: people" wanted him to leave or be removed from office.  Those are the same
: figures Clinton had the day after the House impeachment...

Sorry, NOT true.  Majority opinion had turned against him _before_ the
House committee vote.  That's why some moderate Republicans were saying
early on that you shouldn't impeach a president unless the nation is
behind it.

: 
: BTW, Nixon still had high job approval ratings...
: 
: 

Never a 73% approval.  Even Reagan never had that.