Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Why is a felony conviction for perjury not sufficient?
|
As far as I know he was never convicted of Perjury. He wasn't even disbarred.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Are the $1m in litigation sanctions not sufficient?
|
Following this logic anyone who pays a lot for their defense should get off.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
It's a wonderful syllogism, but as happens in logic it ignores several mitigating (albeit perhaps not sufficiently so) real-world factors:
1) A sitting president was made subject to a civil suit, with no delay
|
I disagree with their decision, but the Supreme Court overwhelmingly said it was OK.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
2) That civil suit had limited factual merit
|
But that is irrelevant to the perjury. The laws surrounding perjury, as far as I know, don't say that perjury is OK for the defendant if the plaintiff has a weak case.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
3) The discovery sought was of limited relevance
|
The judge thought it was relevant. Isn't that the only opinion that matters? So if you are appealing a perjury charge can you claim - well I lied under oath but the judge was wrong in thinking that the questions asked were relevant.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
4) The discovery sought concerned matters that would be considered private by most people
|
Why is that relevant. It is the legal system. There was case precedence that said that in a sexual harassment suit a plaintiff can ask the defendant about their past sexual relations with other employees. Why is it relevant what people think about that precedent?
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
5) The perjury was evasive testimony.
|
I don't see why this is relevant. It is still perjury
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) Had someone other than Clinton given the same testimony in similar circumstances, would the US Attorney likely bring felony perjury charges?
|
I think if it was conclusively discovered that someone was lying - then yes. Do you remember that woman that testified at the congressional hearings who was working in a federal hospital who lied under oath about an affair with an employee and she was given a jail sentence? At the time of her testimony she was under probation and had location tag around her leg.
