Originally posted by plawrence:
And while I could be mistaken here (it's been a while), I believe that Mr. Clinton was accused of committing perjury in his testimony in response to a lawsuit brought against him for sexual harrassment by Paula Jones,
oh, I see. Well, in that case, I agree it's a total different case...
Originally posted by plawrence:
in his testimony before a Grand Jury investigating, among other things, his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.
that is precisely what I'll never be able to understand. Why a Grand Jury had to investigate his affair with Ms Lewinsky.
Originally posted by plawrence:
In other words, I don't think it was anyone's business what he did with Monica Lewinsky as long as he committed no crimes, but since he was under oath he had an obligation to be truthful.
I understand your point now, Plaw.
And I agree. I still can't see why on earth he had to be under oath just because of his personal sex life, since he committed no crime. But I agree that once he had to because the legal/constitutional (?) system permits this, he should have been truthful. Ok, I'll be truthful myself. I found Clinton at the time he was in his office to have a very powerful if primitive erotic energy. In other words I found him to be pretty sexy. If I were a stagist at the White House and had the chance to work for him, I doubt I would have resisted him.....
