Re: Enough!

Gregory Alan Bolcer (
Sat, 12 Sep 1998 15:29:05 -0700

> Starr was given the Whitewater investigation, and he ended up focusing
> on Clinton's sex life. Perhaps instead of lying on the stand about it,
> Clinton should have just plead the fifth amendment. But anyone who
> expects others to tell the truth about their sexual activities is
> begging the question. I don't care what Clinton and Lewinski did
> together, and most of those who say they do are hypocrites or
> demagogues. Was Clinton out of line in other ways? It would have
> been interesting if the Starr report could have proven it.

Nobody cares what Clinton and Lewinsky did together. Sex is
not a crime, Stephen. I take it you didn't read the referral
an are arguing from a standpoint of ignorance. According
to the best information available to the public which is 1) the
original referral from the Attorney General to the 3 judge
panel and 2) the narrative from the Starr report detailing
their authorization, we can conclude that the investigation
was authorized in response to a charge of subornation of perjury
and wasn't about Clinton's sex life at all. Subornation of
perjury means "asking someone to commit a felony" in case
you didn't realize that. I've included the text below from
Starr's report. The original referral in January can be found at:

Notice, both corroborate each other with respect to a) the referral
was in response to subornation of perjury, a felony (not Midemeanors
of Class B or C {this excludes some state's classification of
sodomy as a Class B or C misdemeanor, so it's explicity not about
sex}) and b) was the result of actions taken by targets already
under review under the whitewater investigation, i.e. they were
investigating a jobs-for-silence in the whitewater investigation
and before their very eyes were crimes of perjury, suborning perjury,
and obstruction of justice happening right under their noses and
in the same manner they were trying to corroborate in the
whitewater investigation. So, maybe your premise that they
are undertaking impeachment proceedings becasue of his sexual
escapades is a little off the truth.

It's enough for me. I think he should resign immediately, and if
he doesn't, I hope they throw him in jail for a very long time.
Do you think it's okay to try and coerce somone into committing
a felony?


On January 12, 1998, this Office received information that Monica Lewinsky was attempting to influence
the testimony of one of the witnesses in the Jones litigation, and that Ms. Lewinsky herself was
prepared to provide false information under oath in that lawsuit. The OIC was also informed that Ms.
Lewinsky had spoken to the President and the President's close friend Vernon Jordan about being
subpoenaed to testify in the Jones suit, and that Vernon Jordan and others were helping her find a job.
The allegations with respect to Mr. Jordan and the job search were similar to ones already under review
in the ongoing Whitewater investigation.(9)

After gathering preliminary evidence to test the information's reliability, the OIC presented the evidence
to Attorney General Janet Reno. Based on her review of the information, the Attorney General
determined that a further investigation by the Independent Counsel was required.

On the following day, Attorney General Reno petitioned the Special Division of the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, on an expedited basis, to expand the jurisdiction of
Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr. On January 16, 1998, in response to the Attorney General's
request, the Special Division issued an order that provides in pertinent part:

The Independent Counsel shall have jurisdiction and authority to investigate to the maximum extent
authorized by the Independent Counsel Reauthorization Act of 1994 whether Monica Lewinsky or
others suborned perjury, obstructed justice, intimidated witnesses, or otherwise violated federal law
other than a Class B or C misdemeanor or infraction in dealing with witnesses, potential witnesses,
attorneys, or others concerning the civil case Jones v. Clinton.(10)