--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > wrote: > <snip> > [I wrote:] > > > Not only did you state the law incorrectly, but there > > > are vastly more differences than similarities. > > > > Yes, and they are all -- embarassingly -- in Foley's favour. > > Um, no, to the contrary. > > Just for one thing, Clinton's affair with Lewinsky > was not illegal; she was 22 years old at the time, > a consenting adult (as has already been pointed out > to you, twice now). Had Foley's pages been 22 > years old, he would be in no legal trouble at all. > > And the law in question (the Violence Against Women > Act of 1994), a provision of which the Republicans > used to entrap Clinton into lying about his entirely > legal affair with Lewinsky by making him testify > about his past sexual behavior in an unrelated > sexual harassment lawsuit, was strenuously opposed > by Republicans when it was passed.
Just the opposite of what you say is, in fact, the reality. According to law professor Jeffrey Rosen on page 34 of his Sept. 28, 1998 article "Jurisprudence" in the New Yorker: "In Congress, Susam Molinari, then a Republican from New York, introduced changes to the federal rules of evidence which would allow juries in sexual-assult and child-molestation cases to consider evidence that the accused had committed similar crimes in the past. (Bob Dole introduced a companion bill in the Senate.) Yet a broad cross-section of judges, legal scholars, and congressional Democrats opposed these revisions, in part because they feared that prosecutors might dredge up earlier offenses for which the defendant had never been charged. "In (critics of the legislation's) view, Molinari's zeal to 'protect the public from rapists and child molesters,' as she put it, had produced language that could apply to any fanny-pinching executive, so that the proposed rules would affect not only rape trials but also garden-variety sexual-harassment investigations." And as for Clinton's support of this bill: "At fist, Molinari's proposals drew little support. Then Bill Clinton was elected President, with the help of women voters. 'Clinton basically assisted me in passing that legislation', Molinari said. When Clinton's crime bill stalled in the House, in 1994, she told me, the President called her and asked what he could do to win her support. She agreed to endorse the legislation if the President accepted her amendments aabout admitting the evidence of previous aoffensees by defendants in sex trials. 'He told me that he was shocked that it wan't part of the bill, and he supported it,' Molinari recalled." > > The law that caught Foley, in contrast, was strongly > supported by Republicans. > > Your error in stating the law's provision, incidentally, > was that you claimed it required a defendant in a sexual > harassment case to testify about past sexual harrassment > cases the defendant had been involved in and thus > compelled Clinton to testify about Lewinsky. > > That's obviously wrong just on its face, since Clinton > had never been sued by Lewinsky. > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
