 Clinton's Scandal |  |
SEE ALSO: Impeachment Inquiry | |
|
Clinton's "understanding" of the term sexual relations...
"When I was alone with Ms. Lewinsky on certain occasions in early 1996 and once in early 1997, I engaged in conduct that was wrong. These encounters did not consist of sexual intercourse, they did not constitute sexual relations as I understood that term to be defined at my January 17, 1998 deposition. But they did involve inappropriate intimate contact. These inappropriate encounters ended at my insistence in early 1997. I also had occasional telephone conversations with Ms. Lewinsky that included inappropriate sexual banter. 
"I regret that what began as a friendship came to include this conduct and I take full responsibility for my actions. While I will provide the grand jury whatever other information I can, because of privacy considerations affecting my family, myself and others, and in an effort to preserve the dignity of the office I hold, this is all I will say about the specifics of these particular matters.''  |
|
Open letter toMrs. Hillary Clinton Dear Mrs. Clinton: In February 1974 the staff of the Nixon impeachment inquiry issued a report produced by a group of lawyers and researchers assigned with developing a scholar mmorandum setting forth the "constitutional grounds for presidential impeachmnt." You were a member of that group of lawyers and researchers, barely, I am sure, able to conceal your dislike for President Nixon. Within the year, Nixon would leave offic disgraced , having witnessed articles of impeachment voted against him by the House Judiciary Committee, based in part on your report. Relevant Today I must give you and your colleagues credit. You did not appear to have let personal animus influence your work product, at least not the final, published report. In fact, the report you and your colleagues produced appears objective, fair, well researched and consistent with other materials reflecting and commenting on impeachment. And it is every bit as relevant today as it was 23 years ago. I presume -- but I must ask whether -- you stand by your research and analysis today. You said in 1974 that impeachment, as understood by the framers of our constitution, reflected the long history of the term used at least since late-14th-century England: "one of the tools used by the English" to make government "more responsive and responsible" (page 4 of your report). You also noted then -- clearly in response to those who mistakenly claimed impeachment as a tool to correct "corruption in office" that "alleged damage to the state," was "not necessarily limited to common law or statutory ... Crimes" (page 7) You quoted James Wilson, who at the Pennsylvania ratification convention described the executive (that is, the president) as not being above the law, but rather "in his public character" subject to it "by impeachment" (page 9) You also -- quite correctly -- noted then that the constitutional draftsmen chose the terms describing the circumstances under which a president could be impeached very carefully and deliberately. You noted that "high crimes and misdemeanors" did not denote criminal offenses in the sense that prosecutors employ such terms in modern trials. Rather, in your well-researched memorandum, you correctly noted that the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" was substituted for George Mason's less precise term in an earlier draft of the Constitution: "Maladministration" (page 12 of your report). Not only that, but your further research led you to quote Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England" in support of your conclusion that "high crimes and misdemeanors" meant not a criminal offense but an injury to the state or system of government (page 12). I applaud the extent and clarity of your research. You even note that the U.S. Supreme Court, in deciding questions of intent, must construe phrases such as "high crimes and misdemeanors" not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them (page 12 once again). Magnificent research! Even Alexander Hamilton finds a place in your research. You quote from his Federalist No. 65 that impeachment relates to "misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of public trust" that is "of a nature ... POLITICAL [emphasis in original]" (page 13 of your report). Finally, in bringing your research forward from the constitutional drafting documents themselves, you find support for your properly broad interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in no less a legal scholar than Justice Joseph Story. I was in awe of your use of Justice Story's "Commentaries on the Constitution" (1833) supporting your proposition that "impeachment ... applies to offenses of a political character ... [that] must be examined upon very broad and comprehensive principles of public policy and duty" (pages 16 and 17 of your report). I could not have said it better. You even note that the specific instances on which impeachment has been employed in our country's history "placed little emphasis on criminal conduct" and were used to remove public officials who had "seriously undermined public confidence" through their "course of conduct" (page 21). Clear Basis Mrs. Clinton, when I first raised the notion last month that the House should take but the first step in determining whether impeachment might lie against President Clinton for a pattern of abuse of office and improper administration of his duties, little did I realize your scholarly work 23 years ago would provide clear historical and legal basis and precedent for my proposition. Amazingly, the words you used in your report are virtually identical to those I use today. For example, you said in 1974, much as I did in my March 11, 1997, letter to Judiciary Chairman Hyde, that "[i]mpeachment is the first step in a remedial process" (page 24 of your report) to correct "serious offenses" that "subvert" our government and "undermine the integrity of office" (page 26). Thank you, Mrs. Clinton, for giving Congress a road map for beginning our inquiry. Sincerely,
Bob Barr (R., GA.) Member of Congress
Rep. Barr (R., Ga.) serves on the House Judiciary and Government Reform Committees. He was the U.S. attorney in the Northern District of Georgia under Presidents Reagan and Bush His open letter appeared in the Wall Street Journal, on April 25, 1997 |
SEE ALSO:
Impeaching Trial
"Monica Lewinsky: Behind the Myth'" - based on material which had been gathered for a British documentary and published on the Internet Nov 23. 1998
Smoking Gun: Ken Starr's Dirty Dossier - selection of documents released Sep 21, including a Lewinsky letter to Clinton, excerpts from Lewinsky's interview with the FBI, and Lewinsky's handwritten notes on the affair.
Drudge Report Exclusives - the latest reports from the man who broke the Lewinsky story, including the Clinton paternity allegations concerning Danny Williams.
Ex-Trooper: Hillary & Foster had affair,  investigations into his death have been cover ups
|