The Art of the Public Grovel by Bauer Susan Wise;

Author:Bauer, Susan Wise;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Princeton University Press
Published: 2011-11-24T05:00:00+00:00

The interrogating lawyer pointed out that “sexual relations” had been defined, in the January 17 deposition, as “contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person,” and wondered what kind of “intimate contact” could be considered “inappropriate” and yet not involve any of these body parts. “I think it’s clear,” Clinton snapped. “I do not believe it included conduct which falls within the definition I was given in the Jones deposition…. I thought the definition included any activity by the person being deposed, where the person was the actor and came in contact with those parts of the body … and excluded any other activity. For example, kissing is not covered by that.”

The many pages of the Starr Report, released at the same time as Clinton’s grand jury testimony, included Lewinsky’s statements that she had performed oral sex on the President (which would not have been covered by Clinton’s tortuous understanding of the definition, since he, the “person being deposed,” hadn’t touched Lewinsky in any of the areas mentioned), but also included statements making clear that a “sexual relation,” as described by Jones’s lawyers, had indeed existed. Clinton, pushed to clarify, grew more incoherent (“I think what I thought there was, since this was some sort of—as I remember they said in the previous discussion—and I’m only remembering now, so if I make a mistake you can correct me”).

Finally, one of the lawyers present quoted an earlier statement by Clinton’s attorney: “‘There is no sex of any kind in any manner, shape, or form, with President Clinton.’ That statement is made by your attorney in front of the judge…. That statement is a completely false statement … an utterly false statement. Is that correct?”

“It depends,” Clinton answered, “on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is…. If ‘is’ means is and never has been … that is one thing. If it means that there is none, that was a completely true statement.” (To this, the lawyer, apparently caught between incredulity and amusement, remarked, “Do you mean today that because you were not engaging in sexual activity with Ms. Lewinsky during the deposition that the statement…. might be literally true?”)

This lawerly redefining of language succeeded in producing sympathy for Clinton’s plight because Clinton was actively using his words to avoid being victimized by a vengeful legal system. In the version of events he was creating, Clinton was being oppressed by Starr’s investigation, and was using his words carefully to avoid incriminating himself.

This was immediately understandable to every American watching him. The constitutional right against self-incrimination is central to the American sense of self-protection: “taking the Fifth” has become a slang phrase meaning “no comment.” In American law, this right is connected to an ideal of valid confession as always voluntary. Kevin Crotty writes, “Voluntariness has been, in the words of one court, the ‘ultimate test’ for confessions, and ‘the only clearly established test in Anglo-American courts for two hundred years.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.