-Caveat Lector-
>Is it purely a coincidence that two of the witnesses called by the
>Republicans in the Senate impeachment trial are Jewish and the third is
>black?
No, it shows how the Democrats suck up to certain demographic groups by
making it a point to employ people from those groups...
>Among the calculations of the right-wingers who dominate the Republican
>Party is the knowledge that grilling Vernon Jordan, a wealthy and
>influential black lawyer, humiliating Monica Lewinsky, and bullying Sidney
>Blumenthal, a liberal Jewish journalist turned presidential aide, will, as
>the saying goes, "energize their base."
This crap sounds just like the liberal crap that came out during OJ
Simpson's trial...'poor' OJ, the 'victim' of conservative whites out to
'get' an 'uppity black man'...
While I believe there's a lot more to the Simpson/Goldman murders than
has been officially admitted, I also believe OJ is in no way a totally
innocent 'pawn' of some conservative white conspiracy...
Blacks and Jews CAN be criminals....
And neither Lewinsky or Blumenthal or Jordan is being charged with a
crime here, only called on to give testimony...it's a white male,
ostensibly 'Christian', whose ass is on the line, NOT a Jew or a Black...
>The Republicans consider Blumenthal to have been a prime mover in Hillary
>Clinton's statement on nationwide television a year ago that the Starr
>investigation was part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy."
Which totally backfired and made them both look like the fools they
are...one would think the Republicans would WELCOME the likes of
Blumenthal, more faux pas like Hillary's "I totally believe my husband,
this Lewinsky thing is lies perpetrated by a right-wing conspiracy" will
garner the Republicans a landslide victory in the year 2000...
>But the decision to haul him before the Senate cannot be separated from the
>bigoted views of those forces on which the Republican Party is increasingly
>based, and to which it appeals. History has demonstrated repeatedly a
>connection between the descent of bourgeois politics into reaction and
>intrigue against democratic rights, and the encouragement of racism and
>anti-Semitism. The present events in Washington are no exception.
There is NO difference between the Dems and the Repubs...this sort of
crap only attempts to present to the sheeple which comprise the majority
of the U.S. public that a viable two-party system still exists...
Notice the current emphasis on 'bipartisanship', as if it's some sort of
Holy Grail to acheive?
Why WOULD we want knee-jerk bipartisanship? Isn't the whole IDEA of
political parties is one of CHOICE between OPTIONS...implying a
DIFFERENCE of parties, meaning definite PARTISANSHIP?
Give me the old days of partisanship ANY day...at least you knew where
the partisans stood on issues, at least you had a CHOICE...
>The central trick of the Republicans is a classic Catch 22. They evaded the
>constitutional requirement for impeachment--the commission of "high crimes
>and misdemeanors" against the state
The Constitution says NOTHING about 'against the state'...it says only
'The President, Vice President and all civil Officers shall be removed
from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or
other high crimes and misdemeanors'...period...that's the totality of
the clause...NOTHING about 'against the state'...
>Clinton should be handled no differently than any other criminal case. They
>claimed to be upholding "the rule of law," arguing that Clinton should be
>treated the same as any other defendant--although the result of impeachment
>and conviction would be, not the punishment of an individual, but the
>overturning of two presidential elections.
Since Gore would assume the office, it's hard to see how Clinton's
conviction and removal from office would 'overturn' an election, since
GORE was also elected in those two elections...
And the Founding Fathers developed the standards of impeachment just so
that an election COULD be overturned...why else have it?
>But now that Clinton is on trial before the Senate on charges of perjury
>and obstruction of justice, the Republicans claim that it is not necessary
>to accord Clinton the due process rights to which any ordinary defendant
>would be entitled, on the grounds that this is a political and not a
>juridical process!
No, it IS a judicial process, but not a criminal one...therefore, the
requirements of a CRIMINAL proceeding need not be followed...
>The result is that the Republicans have denied Clinton both the rights
>which the Constitution provides a chief executive facing impeachment in a
>political trial
Which are? WHERE in the Constitution does it spell out 'rights' of an
impeached officer?
>and the rights which the 14th Amendment guarantees to any
>ordinary defendant in a criminal case.
Since it is NOT a criminal trial, the 14th Amendment can not apply...
>�There is no presumption of innocence and no standard of proof "beyond a
>reasonable doubt,"
Well, since Clinton's ADMITTED to lying under oath, it's sort of hard to
'presume innocence' in THAT case...and he hasn't denied doing any of the
ACTIONS which are deemed obstruction of justice, only that such actions
don't constitute obstruction...so again, it's not so much presuming he's
innocent, since he's admitted to the activities...it's just a case of
determining whether they reach the level of obstucting justice...
So it's not really a trial to determine Clinton's innocence, or to prove
'beyond a reasonable doubt' whether he did these things or not...he has
admitted to doing them....rather, it's more a hearing to determine the
possible criminality of the actions...
>Republican Senators--and some Democrats--had publicly declared Clinton
>guilty long before his impeachment.
And there were as many who arbitrarily declared his innocence without
being bothered with 'the facts'...including quite a few Senators, who
publicly announced before the trial started that they would vote to
acquit, since they didn't feel there was 'enough proof'...they stated
this even BEFORE they were presented with any evidence in the Senate...
>The standard of proof is arbitrary:
>whatever it takes to convince a Senator to vote to convict.
Or to acquit, it seems...
>�One of the most important preliminaries to a criminal trial is the
It's interesting that he keeps harping on 'criminal trial', when any
intelligent person knows the Senate impeachment trial is NOT a criminal
trial...so one has to wonder if perhaps 'they doth protest too much'
because they're afraid that what will come out WILL eventually lead to
criminal proceedings...
>Senate. In an ordinary trial, the defense would have virtually unlimited
>right to call witnesses and pursue alternative theories.
Yes...in a CRIMINAL proceeding...which this is NOT...
If Clinton is ever indicted in a CRIMINAL proceeding, then his lawyers
would have the rights stated above...
>�In an ordinary criminal trial, the defendant has an absolute right to
Again, the reference to criminal trial, when in fact the impeachment
trial is CIVIL, not criminal...
>refuse to testify. Clinton was already compelled to testify against himself
>once, in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights, when he was called before
>the grand jury last August.
He could have invoked the Fifth...but rather, he chose to lie...
>Last Wednesday's vote on the resolution to dismiss the charges against
>Clinton, offered by the senior Senate Democrat Robert Byrd, should have
>marked the end of the impeachment trial as a political process. The 44
>votes for dismissal of the charges were far more than the 34 necessary to
>prevent Clinton's conviction and removal from office.
Apples and oranges.
>Undeterred by the vote, however, the Republican prosecutors have pressed
>forward with demands that would only be appropriate for a criminal
>trial--the calling of witnesses, deposition testimony, and further
>arguments--
Gee, I've seen all the above in CIVIL proceedings, too...any number of
private lawsuits routinely call witnesses, take depositions, and present
'futher arguments'...
>in a last-ditch effort to keep the impeachment case going even
>though its political outcome has presumably been determined.
If all of this WAS true...if in fact the acquittal of Clinton is a
foregone outcome, if in fact the Republicans are making such fools of
themselves, one would think the Dems would be REJOICING that the Repubs
are weaving a rope whereby to hang themselves...
But the FACT that Klintonistas are frantically attempting to create this
'spin' proves that they in fact are in a panic...and one has to wonder
what the REAL story is, what it is they're afraid that Lewinsky,
Blumenthal, and/or Jordan (and possibly others) may reveal, and people it
AIN'T about sex (at least, not Clinton's dalliance with Lewinsky)...
June
=======================================================================
The melancholy days are come, the saddest of the year,
Of wailing winds and naked woods, and meadows brown and sear.
-- Wm. Cullen Bryant: The Death of the Flowers
=======================================================================
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------*
revcoal AT connix DOT com
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------*
It is UNLAWFUL to send unsolicited commercial email to this email
address per United States Code Title 47 Sec. 227. I assess a fee of
$500.00 US currency for reading and deleting such unsolicited commercial
email. Sending such email to this address denotes acceptance of these
terms. My posting messages to Usenet neither grants consent to receive
unsolicited commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial
email.
*========================================================================*
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
