> >Ridiculous. Starr is letting the Jones lawyers do all the
> >tabloid work and just stepping in to address the more serious
> >matters.
But according to accounts from reporters who claim to have heard the
infamous tapes, they don't provide evidence that there *are* any "more
serious matters". She talks about screwing around with Cliton, she
says she'll probably lie about it, but according to every reputable
report I've read she *does not* claim or imply on the tapes that
Clinton induced her to lie --- the supposed crime. The only grounds
for believing that he did, at this point, are then a wild-ass guess on
the part of Ken Starr. The rest, as I said, is just tabloid trash.
Roy responded:
> The right thing for the press to do at this point would be to point out
> that harrassment and publication of private information are also crimes.
> Of course, they won't do that, since it would cut into their own business.
Although when Newt was taped in a cell-phone conversation violating
the terms of his agreement with the ethics committee about a year ago,
it's amazing how fast the media forgot about the content of the
conversation, and focused on the propriety of taping cell-phones.
rst