Clinton's Supporters Ignore His Greatest Legal Liability
Democratic leader might well "fret" about the possibility of Whitewater scandals rocking their boat if Bill Clinton gets re-elected ("Democrats fret over strategy if Starr closes in," Page One, Sept. 26). But the rest of us ought to be stewing over the much more horrendous likelihood of this sitting president wrestling with Paula Corbin Jones' sexual harassment charges.
I say "likelihood," even though the Supreme Court has yet to be heard from regarding if and when her charges will finally go to trial. I say so because I find it inconceivable that (1) the high court will not sustain the basic go-ahead rendered by both federal judge Susan Webber Wright and the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis, and (2) the Supreme Court will grant Mr. Clinton four more years of immunity from facing the music. Wishful thinking on my part?
No way. Let me cite three reasons:
* The president has already enjoyed 32 months of immunity and, if given 48 more, will have enjoyed all the advantages of 6 1/2 years of avoiding the hour of truth. Such benefit is not justice delayed by justice denied.
* While it is claimed that the president's official "duties" leave him no time to face a civil suit, nevertheless, he has been and is taking months and months of his time from those "duties" to run for re-election. Running for re-election is not a duty the Constitution lays upon a sitting president.
* The president has already spent hours and hours - amount surely to weeks and months - of official "duty" time on this case. Surely he has been involved in White House meetings, discussions, legal actions, press conferences, TV appearances and his and Hillary's private "frettings" abouty the case. …