Frances Bolton (PHI) wrote:
Oh, glad there's someone here from tampa. I drove past that billboard earlier today and wondered what it meant. I did get the Monica=bj thing, but was mystified by the rest. Is that the same radio station that had the saddam hussein "Madman across the water" billboard? For a time, one of the nude clubs here had a sign out front that read "White House Intern training school." HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
Copy of the Starr report sitting on my kitchen table but I don't have the stomach to read it...
Frances
Oh dig in.
Here's a summary. The entire evidence which compels impeachment, conviction, hanging, drawing, quartering, and hanging the fractions in chains over Clinton's partisans's garden gates, is based upon Clinton's reaction to the perjury trap established on the basis of Linda Tripe's illegal wiretaps.
Yep, that was necessary evidence, you see; that was a point which Dr. Starr felt he had to clear up, for the good of the country, in order to perform his duty, to prepare Congress for their grim task - whether she came or not. I am pleased to be able to report to you that she did. Twice. Thank God. Thank God for that at least.
Now I just don't know how they managed to get some of these details right. I don't mean the orgasm count; that's the kind of thing you'd
Yours WDK - WKiernan at concentric.net ------------------------------------------
Well guys,
see that's the beauty of an open investigation with an unlimited budget and no other duties on the roster--you get the job done right. And, there is the additional beauty of the grand jury system. I think you can compel testimony without regard to the usual judicial protections on testimony and rules of evidence(?), which makes entrapped perjury ever so much more available as an alternate indictment, should the primary branch of the investigation fail to produce results. Of course, how could William Jefferson take the fifth on high sex crimes, and misdemeanors?
My deeper concern is, will Congress have the composure to carry out their farce with sufficiently grim faces and intonements of profundity to bring this moral tragedy to a satisfactory conclusion? I mean if the Speaker has to remind the ranks to conduct themselves in a proper manner, what does this foretell of truly wondrous possibilities that anxiously await us all?
But this reminds me to note something about the Right and its use of morality as a stand in for political discourse. By promulgating the idea of individual moral responsibility as the primary fount of political virtue, the Right is able to divert attention from institutional change. So, we see that poverty for example is the consequence of laziness, bad attitudes, and bad genes and not the consequence of a systemic process (class struggle) of economic and political oppression through means of racism, sexism, and other historically constructed conveniences.
Then, returning to Clinton. By exposing Clinton as a moral reprobate, we are supposed to not notice that the larger atrocity is the perversion of the political and legal process through a combination of media and a ex officio prosecutor with no evidence of high crimes against the State except trapped perjury on a civil suit. The point to the detail is to destroy Clinton's ability to govern whatever the result of the Congressional votes or subsequent response.
I just pray on my Unix box that the stupid son of bitch doesn't resign. Hopefully, he will dig down deep and find the balls to make this abject theater piece play itself all the way out. Not that he has shown anything resembling balls in the past--but there is always hope. It might actually be time to exercise some serious executive power here, Bill. We know the little head works. Now, what about the big head?
Chuck Grimes