Re: Clinton's fake apologies

["Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>]

Jimmy: the "sockpuppets" (as Lucien Goldberg calls them) who
defend clinton on TV (and are probably paid to)
are trying to advance the case that
lying in a civil case is rarely prosecuted, which is true, 
but has nothing to do with the law. apparently clinton & his
slimy lawyer teammates would tend to reassure all the women, such 
as Gennifer Flowers as I recall, that they could lie without
consequence in a civil trial.  at least those women whom they
didn't threaten to "break their pretty legs". a capricious
bunch, hmm?

also, there
may be some legal precedent that unless the lying had
to do with the case, it is not relevant to the case
(a reasonable situation I wouldn't be surprised if some
judge ruled)

but there's just no laws, as I understand it, that ever
allow lying under any circumstances, particularly in sitations
such as court hearings, depositions, etc.  in fact it can be
argued our whole legal system breaks down if lying is ever
sanctioned in any way. that's the problem. weasel clinton 
will always be looking for a loophole. I'm surprised you
gave the slightest credibility to claims that lying is
ever sanctioned under the law. 

there are a lot of paid-lowlife tentacles making the television circuit
defending clinton, I suspect. you've fallen prey to one of their
arguments.  he would have been trashed
long ago if it weren't for their thick, odious & treacherous
smokescreens, imho. there are a lot more traitors in this
country than Clinton, for sure. they all hang out together,
but few sheeple will ever know.