The Lewinsky thing was, at so many levels, evil. It was a trumped up case, using irrelevant testimony, to gin up a non-case (there was no perjury, and lying under oath is not a crime, perjury is a crime) and it seems the Special Counsel primed the pump, so he could manufacture the case, and fan the outrage.
This is a legitimate complaint.
1: Foley seems to have done things which were innappropriate (so did Clinton, and some of them are related, the power differential between Foley/Clinton and Monica/Pages makes it questionable, no matter who initiated it).
2: Foley seems to have broken the law.
3: Members of the Republican Party seem to have been aware of (1) for years, and of (2) for months.
4: They actively covered it up.
Those are very different things to me, than Clinton parsing an answer (which seems to have actually be a non-lie, per the definitions of sex used by the plaintiff's attorney in that deposition) to not admit to an affair; when that affair wasn't relevant.
The ability of the Leadership to see what is, and isn't, improper behaviour, and deal with it,when it comes up, is an issue of fitness to govern.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zvi and
no subject
Date: 2006-10-12 08:44 pm (UTC)The Lewinsky thing was, at so many levels, evil. It was a trumped up case, using irrelevant testimony, to gin up a non-case (there was no perjury, and lying under oath is not a crime, perjury is a crime) and it seems the Special Counsel primed the pump, so he could manufacture the case, and fan the outrage.
This is a legitimate complaint.
1: Foley seems to have done things which were innappropriate (so did Clinton, and some of them are related, the power differential between Foley/Clinton and Monica/Pages makes it questionable, no matter who initiated it).
2: Foley seems to have broken the law.
3: Members of the Republican Party seem to have been aware of (1) for years, and of (2) for months.
4: They actively covered it up.
Those are very different things to me, than Clinton parsing an answer (which seems to have actually be a non-lie, per the definitions of sex used by the plaintiff's attorney in that deposition) to not admit to an affair; when that affair wasn't relevant.
The ability of the Leadership to see what is, and isn't, improper behaviour, and deal with it,when it comes up, is an issue of fitness to govern.
So, no, I don't see the parallels.
TK