How was Clinton's lying different than Libby's?

Question

Clinton accually tried to get others to lie for him, Libby didn't. Should Clinton be in jail? Its hard to say Libby should go to jail without saying Clinton should be in jail. But I bet some folks have different standards for different people, we'll let your answers show us.

Some of you seem to think it's alright to lie in certain situtations. I think your laking in morals.

Answer 1

Clinton did lie under oath. Whether it was over something as stupid as cheating on his wife with an intern or not, it was still LYING UNDER OATH. Because it was something so stupid, he simply should have told the truth and been done with it all.

Frankly, I'm tired of the lot of 'em in DC. They all lie. And we suffer.

Answer 2

Clinton lied about a personal, private matter that had nothing to do with the powers of office, or any breaking of the law. The judge who cited him for perjury also ruled that the questions should never have been allowed to be asked in the first place, since they were not relevant to the case. No matter, he got dinged for perjury.

Legal experts and prosecutors are pretty much unanimous in saying that, if Clinton was an average Joe, he would not have been charged with contempt. For example - if that was the case, then everyone who claims to be innocent and takes the stand, only to be later convicted, would also be up for a perjury charge.

Libby, on the other hand, obstructed an investigation into a criminal offense, and a matter of national security. Contrary to what some may claim here, there WAS and underlying crime. It is true that no one has been charged with it - that's because Scooter's lies made it impossible for Fitzgerald to get to the truth - hence the obstruction charge.

Libby was also lying to cover up a crime that was directed by those above him in office, and his lies prevent them from being held accountable (potentially) for their actions.

Clinton's lies, nor his pardons are as brazen an abuse of the system as Libby's lies or Bush's commutation.

ADDENDUM: As far as your simplistic statement about people thinking it's "okay to lie," you didn't ask if it was okay (is "laking" some kind of water activity?). You asked about the differences between the two, and there is a difference. Not all lies are the same. A child lying about whether they took an oreo cookie off the counter and ate it is different than, say, an energy company executive ruining thousands of lives when lying about the company profits to boost stock prices to personally enrich himself. Lies can be different in seriousness, magnitude and damage done.

Clinton's lie was, truly, a trifle over a nothing issue. Libby's lies are related to a national security breach that set back our WMD non-proliferation efforts, definitely cost lives and continues to hamper our ability to turn foreigners who might want to help us out. This is serious stuff.

Answer 3

To people like you, I am sure there is no difference. Although this will certainly fall on deaf years, you might consider whether there is a difference between (1) a president that lies about getting a bj in the oval office and (2) a high level member of the administration committing treason to punish a citizen for exposing the truth about the president's lies meant to convince this country to go to war, and a lower level staff member instructed to lie take the fall as part of cover up. I am no big fan of Bill Clinton, but to excuse the activities of the current administration by saying, "Well, Clinton lied," is downright childish. "Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." Instead of towing the party line, you might turn off Limbaugh and start thinking for yourself.

Answer 4

A lie is a lie no matter what it is about, or who tells it. Although, in my opinion, that is not the reason people are taking issue with Scooter Libby. For the most part, those who are upset, are upset with the fact that the President chose to disregard the sentence handed down by the judge. I believe that many Conservatives would be just as upset if Clinton had been sentenced to jail time, and had his sentence commuted before serving a single day.

That being said, the President acted on his beliefs and used the powers granted to him by the Constitution in commuting Libby's sentence. It's over and done with, it's time to move on.

Answer 5

It wasn't different.

How does that make what either Libby or bush did.acceptable?

Why are you making excuses for a convicted criminal? It what Clinton did is wrong why isn't what Libby did wrong?



If you people want to set some kind of example for honest behavior by a presidential administration, how can you possibly continue to support wrongdoing under the guise of "Clinton did, so that makes this okay"?

Answer 6

Clinton "lied" about a personal problem--one that should never have been investigated in the first place (at the cost of MILLIONS of American tax dollars) (And he still ended up with a surplus.....) The government bodies investigating him did it mainly to embarrass him, and degrade him.

Libby lied during a CRIMINAL investigation--and he had political reasons for doing so.

It was not "criminal" to have any kind of sex in the Oval office, with another consenting adult, whether it was his wife or not. (Tacky, yes! Criminal, no!) It only became a "crime" because he lied under oath--something almost any man would do if it came to admitting an illicit affair. To impede a criminal investigation, though, IS a crime!

Libby is the ultimate brown-noser, and he deserves to be in jail!

Answer 7

same crimes. Perjury and obstruction of justice. the only distinction is obtainable in the form of which area of the political spectrum you stand on. Liberals have tried each and every way obtainable to erase the crimes Clinton committed. Now conservatives seem doing the same element for Libby. This after years of complaining approximately Clinton no longer being suited punished. The hypocrisy, previous being somewhat a snigger is astonishing previous concept from the two facets. Nick B: Clinton grow to be impeached. Impeachment is the technique. He grow to be no longer convicted by way of impeachment. earlier you start up calling others retarded you're able to truly take a little time to study what you're talking approximately first. Edit: Like I reported hypocrisy. purely seem at each and every of the defenses of Clinton right here. human beings! bill Clinton broke the regulation. He lied below oath. He grow to be present day in contempt of court docket and lost his license to coach regulation for 5 years subsequently. you could think of that the crime resulted from a trivial remember, besides the undeniable fact that it grow to be a criminal offense none the less. right here is what bothers me approximately each and every of the Clinton defenders. while a President lies in a court docket of regulation at the same time as below oath it heavily calls his credibility into question on all different concerns public and private. there's a great kind of lip provider from the left approximately government morals and ethics on the subject remember of the Buish Administartion, the difficulty is you don't be conscious the same frequently happening to the Democratic management. Now you like to hold the proper to blame for doing the same element with their stupid defenses of Libby. Is genuinely each and every physique fairly stunned that our government is so screwed up as quickly as we the human beings won't be able to suited understand and demand punishment for crimes committed the two?

Answer 8

First off, yes it is very different mainly because Clinton KNEW he was lying. Secondly, presidents cannot go to jail they can only be impeached and removed from office and Clinton should have been removed.

Also!! For those of you morons who think Libby blew the cover of a CIA agent obviously you don't know anything because it was Richard Armitage who was the leak not Libby!!! Either way when Valarie Plame was blown she was not covert at the time and just working at the CIA headquarters! Get your facts straight

Asker: Knowing you are lying and having a court PROVE that you lied are totally different things! Especially when you don't think that you lied and when a member of the jury is allowed to stay on even though he is a friend of one of the key witnesses! This case should have been thrown out on that basis alone! This was purely political nonsense and a witch hunt besides to try and get either Rove or Cheney!

Answer 9

I am not aware of clinton's lying about a BJ possibly jeopardizing someone's life like libby outing plame did.

Besides, libby is lying to protect cheney and bush, which is why bush commuted his prison time.

IF you are trying to claim that you never lie then your morals are a LACKING as your spelling/typing.

Answer 10

Because Scooter Libby was convicted in a court of law and sentence by a federal judge according to the federal sentencing guidelines. Congress didn't convict him. Liberals didn't convict him. A court and a judge did. There was nothing improper about the process that got him there. I think it just shows favoritism purely based on the fact that Bush did not pardon or commute the sentence of another public servant recently convicted of the same charge.