Letters to the Editor
-
Judge Suggested Clinton Did Not Lie; Starr Investigation Itself Criminal
During the deposition, the judge actually said the questions were so poorly and confusingly worded that Clinton did not understand them. So the issue of even lying is not entirely clear.
Also, not only did the judge declare that testimony about Lewinsky was not material to the case, she later dismissed the entire case.
The Independent Counsel statute specifies that the standards governing investigation and prosecution were those to be used in ordinary cases by U.S. Attorneys. There is no case on record of a federal criminal prosecution of alleged perjury about a non-material matter in a case that was dismissed (in effect, a non-case). This falls under the "trifles" in that "the law does not concern itself with trifles."
Starr and his minions manufactured a phony case in violation of the Independent Counsel statutes, and used government money to pursue a private vendetta against Clinton. This is itself is at best an abuse of power and at worst a criminal act. They did this because there was no real case to made.
Additionally, using public money for a private purpose is embezzling. That is a real, undisputable crime. The real criminals in the Starr investigation were the independent prosecutor and the judges who enabled him to continue this bogus case, mounted for private, not public purposes, and loot the Tresury of scores of millions of dollars.