- May 3, 2005
- Reaction score
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
scottyz said:We should know for sure tomorrow if there will be any charges. What truth am I hoping to get? The point is the Starr wasn't able to get Clinton on the orignal charges but he was able to get him in a perjury trap. Sounds like Stu is saying that this strategy is an unacceptable way to get Rove or Libby indicted. I'm sure he didn't feel this way when it happened to Clinton. He sounds like Kay Bailey Hutchison atm.
I'm sorry that is false, as far as Monicagate he DID get him on the original charges. Evidence was brought to Starr's office that Clinton and Lewinsky were engaged in a plot to commit perjury and obstruction of justice in a federal court. That Clinton was using his office to reward Lewinsky for committing these crimes to cover up his own judicial problems. This tied into the fact that they were investigating the same thing vis-a-vis Webb Hubble. Did Clinton promise both of them financial gains or jobs if the engaged in these crimes and the fact Vernon Jordan was involved in both. He took this to Reno who told him to add it to his investigations, he didn't want it, he urged her to appoint someone else to handle it but she refused and gave it to his office.