A minor modification of my own post: I am probably wrong in claiming that Clinton "knew" about the impeachment outcome when the crucial decisions were made. It is now clear that this current bombing campaign was set in motion some days ago, which would have been while it was still unclear what the outcome of the vote in the House would be. At that time Clinton may have hoped that it would save him. What is truly unclear at this point is whether or not at the moment he gave the final order to go ahead he knew that the House vote was a foregone conclusion or not. It apparently is now, whatever he hoped or thought at various points and now reportedly knows it. Barkley Rosser On Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:28:59 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) "Rosser Jr, John Barkley" <rosserjb at jmu.edu> wrote:
> I don't know what's going on, other than the obvious
> fact that Clinton has ordered these massive and unjustified
> air strikes on Iraq. The Washington Post claims on its
> front page this morning that the moderate Republicans are
> now pouring into the pro-impeachment column in such numbers
> that Clinton has given up on fighting the impeachment vote
> in the House of Representatives. Despite the delay, it is
> now a foregone conclusion.
> Maybe Clinton viewed this as a last gasp desperate
> move, but it is not going to work, and according to the
> usually pretty well-informed W.P., Clinton knew it and
> knows it.
> The current line out of the W.P. is that the House
> will vote impeachment and the Senate will dispose of the
> matter quickly after the New Year with some kind of censure
> motion, as removal from office will not pass the Senate
> (needs a 2/3 vote in contrast to a mere majority in the
> House). This is one of the reasons that the House
> Republicans feel unafraid to vote for impeachment, thereby
> getting "the Hammer" Tom DeLay off their backs who has been
> threatening everybody with Christian Coalition opponents in
> primaries if they don't support impeachment.
> Barkley Rosser
> On Wed, 16 Dec 1998 17:37:36 -0800 (PST) "C. Petersen"
> <ottilie at u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > I had expected a rush of letters from the USA opposing the bombing that has
> > > been going on for two hours now. There are only a couple. It poses the
> > > question of what is the basis of campaigning for peace now.
> > >
> >
> > Is there any way in which Saddam Hussein would be benefitted by having
> > Clinton in power? He had to know how convenient this would be for Clinton,
> > and he did in fact choose to mess with the inspectors precisely 1-2 days
> > before the impeachment hearings, and these republican senators are on the
> > television saying the phrase 'support our troops' about 4 times per thirty
> > seconds, and clearly couldn't dare mess with Clinton right now. It gives
> > the moderate republicans a big out.
> >
>
> --
> Rosser Jr, John Barkley
> rosserjb at jmu.edu
>
>
-- Rosser Jr, John Barkley rosserjb at jmu.edu