-----Original Message----- From: MScoleman at aol.com <MScoleman at aol.com> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Saturday, September 12, 1998 10:27 PM Subject: re: Deep throat or shallow press?
>
>I think Clinton has acted like a real cad ....
Maggie, I agree with almost everything you have said here. However, I think there are a couple of things that are ;unfortunately newsworthy however.
1. The power of the special counsel/prosecutor is abusive in that there is no limit on his power to dig up salcious material and make this a matter of national discussion. Starr has been investigating Cliton's business dealings in Arkensas under taxpayer expense and has been unable to come up with anything worth reporting in four years of investigation.
2. The whole pornographic report is inappropriate. It was obtained via legal extortion, that is Linda Tripp reported taped private conversations between Monica and herself about her affair. Monica may or may not have told Linda Tripp the whole truth, there is no way of knowing. Monica had lied under oath denying an affiar with Clinton. Star then threatens to charge her with perjury and I think obstruction and I think trumped up charges against the rest of her family. When Lewinsky refused still to testify further against the preseident Starr told her that the testimony whe gave was not enough.
3. This is a 24 year old girl with no protection then corroborates what she said on the tapes. I am not a lawyer so I don't no about admissability of evidence and I am sure she has reason to be angry at sleazy Clintion. But to save her family I personally might make up any storry Starr felt acceptable. Starrs entire account could be mostly fabrication especially when documenting the sexual relationship. There is virtually no real way to know the details of this affair because it has no independent witnesses for the most part. The whole reason for this investigation was as far as I can tell irrelevant testimony about Lewinsky in another sexual harrasment civil suit.
4. There is actually a possiblity of bring down a government which is ia big deal in a Presidential System over essentiallly inappropriate trumped up charges. The house is actually considering impeachment proceedings. In any event, the government is crippled because of Clinton's sleazy sexual relations, which I do not think is sufficient grounds for this.
The problem is with the independent counsel law which really I must say needs to be discussed publicly. As much I do not particularly like Clinton or his policies such legal harrassment makes it very difficult for any government to get anything done. The procedures invoiked in this case resemble a Star Chamber (no pun indended). A better procedure would be the Congress directly rule on the purpose of the investigation which should be submitted in advance. If Congress doesn't care to have a matter investigated as measured say by a 2/3 vote of both houses the matter becomes inadmissable. A worse procedure would be a public ruling by the Supreme Court. Also there needs to be a clear limitation on what crimes a president or his adminstration can be accused of.by a special counsel and some limitations about when the crimes occured..
In the case that somebody is held responsible other than the Speical Prosecutor for whats going on. I doubt given the public opinion on this issue that the house and senate would have voted to continue the investigation. If so they would at least be held accountable for the subject matter.
I haven't voted for a long time but I am going to vote straight democratic in this election. I think there is no real choice but I do think that this procedure is a clear abuse of power. If everybody who supports this abuse suffers for it they will at least think twice the next time.