Clinton Lying Says Lewinsky

[Aaron]

CBC

LONDON - Monica Lewinsky, whose affair with former U.S. president Bill Clinton led to his impeachment battle, says his new autobiography contains more lies about their relationship, according to a British newspaper.

"He could have made it right with the book," Lewinsky, 30, told the Daily Mail. "But he hasn't. He is a revisionist of history. He has lied."

Clinton writes in his new memoir My Life that his affair with Lewinsky was the "darkest part of my inner life."

Lewinsky said his description of their relationship, which took place while she was a White House intern, made it sound like she pursued him and that the affair was purely physical.

"I really didn't expect him to go into detail about our relationship." she said. "But if he had and he'd done it honestly, I wouldn't have minded," she said.

"I did, though, at least expect him to correct the false statements he made when he was trying to protect the presidency.

"Instead, he talked about [the relationship] as though I had laid it all out there for the taking. I was the buffet and he just couldn't resist the dessert," she said.

Lewinsky said it "was a mutual relationship, mutual on all levels, right from the way it started and all the way through."

Little bit of he said, she said going on.

[Montcalm]

I remember hearing about her having a relationship with one of her teacher,and they said she likes men in powers and the prez is the highest thing she could ever go for......or suck

[Stormbringer]

CBC

<SNIP>

Little bit of he said, she said going on.

It sounds more like it's, she said, he lies. But honestly, what really did any one expect? The man was willing to perjure himself and try and get other to do so as well. Just because he wrote a stupid book doesn't mean he's suddenly gone honest.

[Howedar]

I'm not going to take the word of one over the other, they're both scum.

[Elfdart]

CBC

<SNIP>

Little bit of he said, she said going on.

It sounds more like it's, she said, he lies. But honestly, what really did any one expect? The man was willing to perjure himself and try and get other to do so as well. Just because he wrote a stupid book doesn't mean he's suddenly gone honest.

When did Clinton commit perjury? When did he try to get others to commit the crime? Do you even know what "perjury" is?

I look foreward to your answers.

[Stormbringer]

When did Clinton commit perjury? When did he try to get others to commit the crime?

In his testimony related to the Paula Jones suit. According to reports, which seem largely accurate all things considered, Clinton also tried to get a number of friends (Rober Jordan wasn't it) to help him cover up his indiscretion for the matter.

His denial under oath of his affair would consitute perjury.

Do you even know what "perjury" is?

Yes, I do. There are some little legal curlicues but it boils down to lying under oath.

I look foreward to your answers.

I look foward to you growing a brain. Unfortunately I have the feeling I'm going to be waiting a while.

[Aaron]

When did Clinton commit perjury? When did he try to get others to commit the crime? Do you even know what "perjury" is?

I look foreward to your answers.

Didn't Clinton perjur himself at the impeachment hearings when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"?

[Howedar]

To a thinking person, yes. However some semantic weaseling technically means he might not have committed perjury depending on what definition of "sexual relations" he was using.

It's the sort of thing where OJ is not legally a murderer but everybody knows he did it.

[Elfdart]

When did Clinton commit perjury? When did he try to get others to commit the crime? Do you even know what "perjury" is?

I look foreward to your answers.

Didn't Clinton perjur himself at the impeachment hearings when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"?

That quote was from a press conference, where he wasn't under oath. In any event, "sexual relations" means coitus, an act neither Clinton nor Lewinsky admits to engaging in. Both say it stopped at Third Base. Unless a witness comes foreward or a videotape turns up showing the two of them in the act, there's no lie on Clinton's part. Perjury has to be an outright lie, not pettifoggery -an art Clinton mastered decades ago.

[Stormbringer]

When did Clinton commit perjury? When did he try to get others to commit the crime? Do you even know what "perjury" is?

I look foreward to your answers.

Didn't Clinton perjur himself at the impeachment hearings when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"?

That quote was from a press conference, where he wasn't under oath. In any event, "sexual relations" means coitus, an act neither Clinton nor Lewinsky admits to engaging in. Both say it stopped at Third Base. Unless a witness comes foreward or a videotape turns up showing the two of them in the act, there's no lie on Clinton's part. Perjury has to be an outright lie, not pettifoggery -an art Clinton mastered decades ago.

Thank you for providing an exact re-enactment of Clinton's semantic weaseling. The fact is that in denying it "sexual relations" with her any reasonable person would conclude that to mean that no sexual acttivities of any kind took place. Indeed that's the very meaning Clinton deliberately fostered in contradiction to the truth. That does constitute a decent case for perjury.

[darthdavid]

Didn't Clinton perjur himself at the impeachment hearings when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"?

That quote was from a press conference, where he wasn't under oath. In any event, "sexual relations" means coitus, an act neither Clinton nor Lewinsky admits to engaging in. Both say it stopped at Third Base. Unless a witness comes foreward or a videotape turns up showing the two of them in the act, there's no lie on Clinton's part. Perjury has to be an outright lie, not pettifoggery -an art Clinton mastered decades ago.

Thank you for providing an exact re-enactment of Clinton's semantic weaseling. The fact is that in denying it "sexual relations" with her any reasonable person would conclude that to mean that no sexual acttivities of any kind took place. Indeed that's the very meaning Clinton deliberately fostered in contradiction to the truth. That does constitute a decent case for perjury.

*cough*yellowcakeuranium*cough*

[Elfdart]

Didn't Clinton perjur himself at the impeachment hearings when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"?

That quote was from a press conference, where he wasn't under oath. In any event, "sexual relations" means coitus, an act neither Clinton nor Lewinsky admits to engaging in. Both say it stopped at Third Base. Unless a witness comes foreward or a videotape turns up showing the two of them in the act, there's no lie on Clinton's part. Perjury has to be an outright lie, not pettifoggery -an art Clinton mastered decades ago.

Thank you for providing an exact re-enactment of Clinton's semantic weaseling. The fact is that in denying it "sexual relations" with her any reasonable person would conclude that to mean that no sexual acttivities of any kind took place. Indeed that's the very meaning Clinton deliberately fostered in contradiction to the truth. That does constitute a decent case for perjury.

A decent case for getting laughed out of court is more like it. By the law (the actual testimony was part of a legal proceeding, remember?), what Clinton said was the truth. If something is true under the law, then it is impossible for it to be perjury. Clinton was slapped for contempt by Judge Wright for being evasive, but that's not perjury. People should quit slinging around legal terms they don't know the meaning of.

[Stormbringer]

A decent case for getting laughed out of court is more like it. By the law (the actual testimony was part of a legal proceeding, remember?), what Clinton said was the truth. If something is true under the law, then it is impossible for it to be perjury. Clinton was slapped for contempt by Judge Wright for being evasive, but that's not perjury.

Actually, the fact is that a case could be made for perjury for the very simple reason that it depended on misleading sematic interpertation to be true. It certainly wouldn't have been laughed out of court.

People should quit slinging around legal terms they don't know the meaning of.

Funny, but it seems people understand the term just fine. It's just that people don't agree that a torturous, twisted sematics problem counts as truthful.

[Joe]

Eh, who gives a shit. It's over.

It's funny, I loathed Clinton when he was in office but I can't really conjure up any strong feelings of dislike towards him now.

[Darth Wong]

Storm, give it up for fuck's sake. Any reasonable person will conclude that neither of them is a reliable witness, but in your zeal to attack Clinton you have acted as though Lewinsky is a paragon of honesty rather than the neurotic headcase that everyone else knows her to be.

[SirNitram]

...This crap is news? Didn't we get something interesting or something? They declassified those memos? People dying because they're stupid in France?

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

To a thinking person, yes. However some semantic weaseling technically means he might not have committed perjury depending on what definition of "sexual relations" he was using.

It's the sort of thing where OJ is not legally a murderer but everybody knows he did it.

Yes, but murder is also ethically wrong, and that's the point. Lying about one's sex life to someone who had no right to ask in the first place isn't. So the fact that he basically lied under oath even though he technically didn't really has no bearing on anything.

[Spyder]

Hey everybody, Bill Clinton got a blow job. Just in case you missed it the first time around. If you still care you need to be locked up.

[The Kernel]

Fucking idiots, has anyone actually read her statements? They are mainly semantic nitpicks about what their relationship was like (whether or not she was actually offering herself without him even trying or whatnot) and such a thing is so varying and open to interpretation that they both might be telling the truth! Besides, Lewinsky has said many times how madly in love she was with Clinton at the time, and I don't exactly trust that her memory isn't a little bit skewed in that regard.

For fuck's sake people this is nothing new, so go back to your fucking holes in the ground.

[Ma Deuce]

*cough*yellowcakeuranium*cough*

The right-wingers' standard tactic of trying to deflect criticism of Bush by sprouting a list of Clinton's misdeeds is rightfully frowned upon on this board, but you sir are commiting the mirror image of that. This debate is about CLINTON, not Bush, or not Bush vs. Clinton, just CLINTON. Bringing Bush into this thread is just as wrong as bringing Clinton into a thread that is entirely about Bush...

[Glocksman]

Clinton was never convicted of perjury as the Senate failed to convict after the indictment was sent to them by the House. Legally he is not guilty of perjury.

Did he act unethically? The Arkansas Supreme Court thought so as they filed suit to suspend his law license and as part of the agreement to end the Whitewater probe, Clinton accepted the suspension instead of contesting it.

CNN Story

n January, Clinton reached an agreement with independent counsel Robert Ray that suspended his Arkansas law license for five years and ordered the former president to pay $25,000 in fines to that state's bar officials. Clinton also gave up any claim of repayment of his legal fees in the matter.

In return, Ray ended the 7-year Whitewater probe that shadowed most of Clinton's two terms in the White House.

The Arkansas Supreme Court's Committee on Professional Conduct initially called for Clinton's disbarment last year, saying he lied about his affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

Clinton was asked about Lewinsky during a January 1998 deposition in a sexual harassment suit brought by Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state employee. His attempt to conceal the affair while under oath led to his 1998 impeachment and 1999 acquittal by the Senate.

[Glocksman]

Correction: The Arkansas SC wanted to disbar him, not just suspend his law license. They compromised and suspended it for 5 years rather than go through the process of disbarment and the legal drama that would follow.

[The Nomad]

People dying because they're stupid in France?

What did we French ever do to you ? Why so much hate ?

[SirNitram]

People dying because they're stupid in France?

What did we French ever do to you ? Why so much hate ?

I'm referring to how the last summer had people dying off in France because they didn't use air conditioning.

As for what they did to me, I went to Paris a few times. Can you argue about the assholishness of the average Parisian towards a Brit?

[The Nomad]

I'm referring to how the last summer had people dying off in France because they didn't use air conditioning.

They didn't die because of the lack of air conditioning, but because of the lack of general measures ( hydratation, regular medical monitoring ) to help old senile fragile people withstanding to an unusual fucking heat wave.
I'm not saying this isn't bad for our image, but you're grossly exaggerating it.

As for what they did to me, I went to Paris a few times. Can you argue about the assholishness of the average Parisian towards a Brit?

You mean "the assholishness of the average Parisian towards a human being", right ?