Skip to comments.Clinton breaks deal with prosecutor - Now says charges against him as president were false
Posted on 06/02/2005 4:28:29 PM PDT by CHARLITE
President Bill Clinton told NBC's Brian Williams tonight charges brought against him by the House of Representatives were false, contradicting a plea bargain deal he made with Independent Counsel Robert Ray that he admit he gave false testimony under oath to a federal grand jury.
In a blistering attack on Ray's predecessor, Kenneth Starr, Clinton accused the independent counsel of persecuting innocent people, indicting them because they wouldn't lie and assaulting the Constitution.
"I was acquitted," he told Williams. "And ... the charges that the House sent to the Senate were false. So I did a bad thing. I made a bad personal mistake. I paid a big price for it. But I was acquitted because the charges were false."
There was no follow-up by Williams.
The articles of impeachment passed by the House in 1998 included the accusation that he lied under oath. Yet, Clinton admitted Jan. 19, 2001, as part of his deal with Ray, he had lied under oath while testifying about his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
"I tried to walk a fine line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely," he said in a written statement. "But I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish that goal and that certain of my responses to questions about Ms. Lewinsky were false.
Why am I not surprised?
"There was no follow-up by Williams."
And why am I not surprised by THAT?
It just hurts so bad being the only convicted felon to serve as President, doesn't it BENT ONE?.
Have I got that right?
Time to release ALL the documents that were withheld from the public during the Impeachment. Let history and the public decide.
He NOW realizes that what he LIED about THEN weren't true? ROFL
I was thinking about that, too. Anyone know?
Man that gut is full of himself...sounds like a con man carni...
"Why am I not surprised?"
It all depends on the meaning of the word "surprised". !!!1
Try him again! Or, revoke whatever advantages he gained from his plea deal and send him to the slammer.
I must have missed the part about Clintoon entering into a plea bargain. When did this occur?
Nice to see that your SOCIOPATH in CHIEF is back in the news...someone needs to ask Hitlery if she agrees with the slimeball that he was falsely charged and pled out to save the country...maybe she can run for your Presidency in 2008 on this mindless drivel,....wouldn't surprise me at all...the MSM would swoon with orgasmic pleasure at the opportunity to vindicate these really sick creatures ...ahhh..the Dummies trifecta at work here isn't it?...woe be us ...we did wrong...but we are victims so its ok...BIG BARF ALERT on this post...EH BOYS
No, the charges were true.
He was acquitted because we have a Congress full of wussies.
Is a refusal to prosecute an aquittal?
those 900 FBI files sure allow a feller to thumb his nose at justice, don't they?
"Break a deal, face the wheel."
If ever a story demanded the "not this **** again" picture...
Yeah, nothing like reminding the nation of the parade of scandals that were the Clinton Presidency, as Mdm. Hillary prepares her own take-over.
Since he backed out of his end of the deal, I think the records that are supposed to be sealed for 50 years should be released.
I did so want to believe him.
I'm sure there was a subsequent segment that NBC didn't air which had Williams slipping on a pair of kneepads and.......
True, but you also perjured yourself, and obstructed justice in lying in a deposition involving a case in which you were the defendant.
(Still perpetuating the lie that it was "all about sex.")
"I'm sure there was a subsequent segment that NBC didn't air which had Williams slipping on a pair of kneepads and......."
Were these used and stained knee pads borrowed from Monica?
What's that old saying about making a deal with the devil?
No, Brian Williams, as do most liberal journalists, have more than one set of Clinton kneepads all their own! ROFLMAO
Not a lawyer, but this is a special case. I'd say this plea agreement was basically a fig-leaf for both sides. It allowed the situation to de-escalate while appearing to reach a definitive conclusion.
As a practical matter, you can never reach a permanent, honorable deal with a rascal like Clinton. He's way too slippery.
Your tagline: "Well, a Democratic socialist ...is basically a liberal Democrat" - Howard Dean - DNC Chairman
I'm not a fan of Democratic Socialists or liberal Democrats, but you're using an ellipse to change what Dean said. He said that Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist but is really more of a liberal Democrat.
There are far worse sins than taking Howard Dean out of context, but we have the facts on our side; no need not to play it straight.
Nice going Billy, keep refreshing the public's memory of your foibles, they might forget otherwise.......
..I don't think so---an acquittal means to "pronounce someone NOT GUILTY" --- I don't think anyone (except Bubba, in his own mind) would say that Clinton was NOT GUILTY...
I think though, if he wants to open up this case again, by these remarks, we should get to "try" him again..
Well, if he were breaking the plea agreement as the title indicates, that last quotation certainly contradicts. Clinton said certain of my statements were false. Given that those false statements were under oath, I'd say that's an admission of perjury.
Clinton interviews make my eyes glaze over. He speaks a lot, contradicts himself, and in the end says nothing. To liberals this is a sign of "high intelligence". He just looks like a slick huckster to me.
No I think it should read Bill Clinton is lying when he denies that he "told the truth" about his lying.
Yup, after a trial on the facts. It was no such thing. He thinks our memories are much shorter, and our knowledge much flimsier than they are.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
What a dork.
To paraphrase an old Washington line: "Have you no shame, sir?"
President Clinton and Independent Counsel Robert Ray agreed Friday to settle the seven-year Whitewater probe. The president admitted that he gave misleading testimony in the 1998 Paula Jones case about his affair with Monica Lewinsky, accepted a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license, and promised to cover $25,000 in legal fees related to disbarment proceedings against him in Arkansas. In exchange, Ray agreed not to indict Clinton on perjury charges. What kind of agreement is this?
It's not your everyday legal agreement. It's not a declination, in which a prosecutor drops a criminal investigation because the case isn't solid enough to indict. Nor is it a plea bargain, in which a prosecutor accepts a guilty plea from the indicted in exchange for a lenient sentence (because, of course Clinton was never indicted). Nor is it a referral of a criminal case to civil authorities for resolution (such as when a criminal antitrust case is referred to civil prosecutors). The most unusual aspect of the deal is that Clinton reached a civil resolution with a criminal prosecutor.
Independent counsel Robert Ray's non-plea plea bargain with President Clinton may be a salutary contribution to decriminalizing our politics. Never mind that it was completely unconstitutional.
The substance of the plea bargain, in broad outline, seems fair enough. Ray agreed to decline prosecution "with prejudice" in effect forever immunizing Clinton from any Lewinsky-related federal criminal liability. In exchange, Clinton agreed to give up his Arkansas law license for five years and to pay yet another fine, and finally admitted that he "knowingly violated" judicial orders with deposition answers that were "evasive" and "misleading" and attimes downright "false." Better still would have been a forthright admission in person, and not just on paper that "I lied." Clinton's lies were brazen, yet his confession was not equally blunt. He lied with his own lips, and it would have been better for him to confess in the same way, righting his earlier wrong in the most symmetrical way. Instead, Clinton's legalistic "confession" was read aloud by a press secretary. I confess he did it. Mistakes were made.
"President Bill Clinton told NBC's Brian Williams tonight charges brought against him by the House of Representatives were false"
...and monkeys might fly out his a$$ too.
Dean: Well, a Democratic socialist--all right, we're talking about words here. And Bernie can call himself anything he wants. He is basically a liberal Democrat
Granted he was talking about one specific, self proclaimed 'Democratic Socialist'. But, I think my tagline is still appropriate. Also note Taranto's comment in the post linked above.
Wussies yes but I also believe that by removing Klintoon from office it would have made Al Bore President thereby giving him a stronger chance of defeating the repub nominee. (Refresh my memory, was Bush the repub nominee prior to or after the impeachment?)
Thanks, I forgot about that.
Go away. Please, go away.
He was aquitted because trent lott is a spineless knee pad wearing sissy sub boy.
Cheerleader lott now has his tutu all in a dither, thinking he is going to get to be head "bitch" again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.