# Did Hillary ever apologize? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 4, 2003, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715 "2003-06-04T23:44:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/61 "2003-06-05T17:42:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > \*\* > **Scylla** , yes, there was a blowjob. That is not in question. The context _you’re_ missing (or deliberately ignoring?) is why it was made anyone else’s damn business, much less a prosecutor with a charge to find something to get him with (and his failures to do so with anything substantive), and why it was in the political arena at all much less to the point of an attempted overruling of democracy itself. \*\* I apologize for ignoring the context. I’ll remedy that now for you. The reason that it is “somebody else’s damn business,” is because of its relation to a case of rape that the President was accused of and perjured himself in regards to. Now if you are going to argue that Clinton is a victim of a VRWC being fabricated him, don’t you find it hard not to choke a little when the “fabricated” accusations turn out to have merit? It’s tough to claim conspiracy when you actually did the things you are being accused of, isn’t it? > [@](#): > > Re the existence of the VRWC specifically, do some research on the names Richard Mellon Scaife and Larry Klayman. You might learn something. OK, maybe it wasn’t all that vast, and “cabal” might be a better word than “conspiracy”, but still, wake up and smell the coffee. I’m sniffing, but all I smell is stale milk on a soggy Fruit Loop. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/62 "2003-06-05T17:44:13Z")
> [@](#): > > And don’t make the distinction of “under oath” – if an incumbent President calls for the support of the American people in the waging of a war, he damn well better be telling the truth to them! Oh, horseshit, **Polycarp** , and you know a great deal better than that. If you would like to throw out the distinction between “legal” and “illegal”, and based articles of impeachment on whatever is disapproved of on the editorial page of The Washington Post, we might as well dispense with the bother of elections at all. Not that it would help. Clinton was just as convinced as Bush that Saddam had WMD, and also launched military action as a result of it. (At least, that was the public justification. I don’t think I am betraying any state secrets if I point out that he was trying like hell not to be impeached. So if people need to be cast out of office for launching military actions based on motives other than what is acceptable to the Democrats, Clinton would **still** have been impeached.) Providing we all “have the decency to be consistent”. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/63 "2003-06-05T17:46:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > > * * * > > I apologize for ignoring the context. I’ll remedy that now for you. The reason that it is “somebody else’s damn business,” is because of its relation to a case of rape that the President was accused of and perjured himself in regards to. > \*\* Cite for “its relation to a case of rape the President was accused of and perjured himself in regards to” please. AFAICR, it was the Paula Jones harassment case in which he was deposed and asked the Monica question. Harassment does not equal rape, and Paula Jones did not accuse him of rape. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/64 "2003-06-05T17:50:08Z")
Poly: > [@](#): > > Am I correct in assuming that all the people who felt that it was right to impeach President Clinton for lying about having had oral sex with Monica Lewinsky will shortly be starting a thread demanding the impeachment of the incumbent President Bush for lying about weapons of mass destruction? I’m pretty confident the weapons will show up in due time. If they don’t then we can talk about it. This is not simply an adulterer lying about sex. This is a man testifying in regards to a charge of rape levelled against him. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/65 "2003-06-05T17:54:37Z")
The official legal definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors” as regards impeachment is, according to experts in Constitutional law, whatever the House of Representatives and Senate consider it to be. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/66 "2003-06-05T17:56:05Z")
Wring: I beleive you’re correct. It was sexual harassment, not rape. My bad. Hopefully though we’ve successfully fought Elvis’ ignorance as to the context of why it was germaine. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/67 "2003-06-05T17:56:31Z")
Don’t forget the sexual harassment charges were brought up by a woman (Paula Jones) whose legal team had ties to the Independent Prosecutor (Ken Starr), and that the prosecutor kept this conflict of interest hidden from the Attorney General (Janet Reno) when he sought to expand his investigation beyond the Whitewater real estate deal. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/68 "2003-06-05T17:57:50Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\* > I apologize for ignoring the context. I’ll remedy that now for you. The reason that it is “somebody else’s damn business,” is because of its relation to a case of rape that the President was accused of and perjured himself in regards to._\* How’s rape come into this? The perjury relates to a civil sexual harrassment suit, not a rape charge. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/69 "2003-06-05T18:02:17Z")
Actually upon googling, Paula Jones did claim to have been raped by Bill. I think the only charge pursued was harassment though. Anyway, obviously his sexual proclivities and habits become germaine in such an instance. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/70 "2003-06-05T18:19:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \* > **december** - that’s an inapposite comparison. If the person speaking was someone who ordinarily used the term ‘fag’ to describe a stick of wood, AND the context of the conversation was such that it made sense to accuse Mr. Frank of being a stick of wood… well, then it’d be fine, yes. But I’m hard-pressed to imagine how that might actually happen. Me too. But, I’m also hard-pressed to imagine how someone would use the term “conspiracy” about a group of people to mean something other than wrongful behavior. Particularly when the speaker is a lawyer, and the legal definition is \*An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action. \* > [@](#): > > It’s true that I advanced the second definition, rather than the first. However, that doesn’t mean that the second is substantially less common than the first. For example, if a word has two meanings, one used 51% of the time and the other 49% of the time, can you really suggest it’s substantially weaker to advance the second meaning? After all, something must be listed first. As long as the word is used correctly, and no other intrinsic evidence points away from the meaning I’m arguing, I’m absolutely entitled to use the second, third, or fifth meaning. It’s true that for some words, the 2nd meaning is almost as common as the first. But, you’ve not offered evidence that that this is true of the word “conspiracy.” I suggest that this is _not_ the case here, because the exculpatory definition isn’t even included in _[dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com)_. Nor is it clear that this definition is appropriate for people, as opposed to forces. A question for **Bricker** and **wring** : Would you defend Richard Nixon, Clarence Thomas, Ronald Reagan, John Ashcroft, or George W. Bush if any of them asserted there was a “vast left wing conspiracy” against him? There certainly were vast forces arrayed against each of them, but I wouldn’t defend that usage. I’d call it red-baiting. ---
**Author:** ![Binarydrone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Binarydrone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Binarydrone)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/71 "2003-06-05T18:35:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\*…I’m pretty confident the weapons will show up in due time. If they don’t then we can talk about it. \*\* On this front: You (and others) have made statements to this effect in several other threads. I have done a little digging around, to see what period of time was agreed upon, and am not having luck. That being the case, I will just ask: At what point is it reasonable to assume that the WMD issue was a bogus one? How long do we give Bush to find the massive stockpiles that were supposed to have existed? At what point will the folks that believed that this was the reason for the war start to feel as if they were lied to? I have a stated goal in life to be polite, and I don’t wish to cry wolf or be alarmist but would like some clarification as to when (as far as the more conservative folks are concerned) this becomes an appropriate topic for conversation. Thanks in advance. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/72 "2003-06-05T18:45:10Z")
Binarydrone: Personally, I think about six months from the close of the war should be adequate for us to have a good idea of what the WMD situation is. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/73 "2003-06-05T18:52:32Z")
**binarydrone** , it ain’t gonna happen. At no point will the superscyllious ever be forced to admit they were not only wrong about the facts but wrong about the morality. It will always be possible to say they are still hidden, or got moved somewhere we haven’t looked yet, or are in the hands of who-knows-what terrorist organization, until the whole thing fades away under the news of other problems in the world, and that sadly doesn’t take long. Meanwhile, it’s just another example of how the dupable can continue to be duped. At some point, it isn’t even necessary to continue to dupe them; they’ll do it to themselves. **Scylla** , your willingness to believe that the Monica story appeared out of the air, unrelated to the rest of the indefensible (and undefended even by you) Get Clinton For Something effort, whatever you want to call it, appearing whole and intact and pure as a gift from the Vindication Fairy, is indeed touching. But you’d do yourself a great deal more good by facing facts, even the ones that go against the view you’d prefer to hold. Several others on this board have been able to do so and admit it, and you can too. But meanwhile, it’s simply more evidence of your self-dupability. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/74 "2003-06-05T19:10:09Z")
Elvis: > [@](#): > > Scylla, your willingness to believe that the Monica story appeared out of the air, unrelated to the rest of the indefensible (and undefended even by you) Get Clinton For Something effort, whatever you want to call it, appearing whole and intact and pure as a gift from the Vindication Fairy, is indeed touching But you’d do yourself a great deal more good by facing facts, even the ones that go against the view you’d prefer to hold. Several others on this board have been able to do so and admit it, and you can too. But meanwhile, it’s simply more evidence of your self-dupability. Can I have that again in simple declarative sentences, please? ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/75 "2003-06-05T19:13:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Binarydrone \* > At what point will the folks that believed that this was the reason for the war start to feel as if they were lied to? There are 3 possibilities:[ol][li]The WMDs alleged by the Bush administration were actually present before the war, but they were hidden or destroyed or moved out of the country.[_]There were no WMDs, but Bush claims accurately represented what his intelligence reports told him.[_]Bush lied about what the intelligence reports said.[/ol]We should soon know if #3 is the case, because Bush has given all the intelligence material to the Senate Intelligence Committee. If these reports don’t back up Bush’s claims, then he will be in big trouble, and deservedly so. [/li] However, if the intelligence reports do support Bush’s statements, then we must find out what happened to the WMDs. Either our intelligence agencies screwed up or a bunch of WMDs are still out there somewhere. Either way, it’s important for us know. ---
**Author:** ![Pabitel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbce88/32.png) [@Pabitel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pabitel)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/76 "2003-06-05T19:20:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \* > \*\*Not to claim sainthood, but if the entire might of the federal government were focused on me… they wouldn’t find anything. No martial infedelity, and more importantly, since that’s not a federal crime anyway, no instance of lying under oath about it. Nor would I lie under oath. No cheating on taxes. No insider trading. In short, I live my life, perhaps boringly, inside the law. \*\* That’s nice. I think that makes you a member of a minority that makes up probably 1% of the population. My point was that even after years of sifting through this man’s personal life they couldn’t even come up with a violation of the law. Instead they found a secret that he was trying to keep. Yes, he lied about it under oath. If lying, under oath or not, were enough to keep a person from being President then no one who ran for the office could be sworn in if they won. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \*\*\*By the way, Degrance, you do realize that Mr. Clinton was accused of lying UNDER OATH about a series of sexual experiences, right? I ask only because you characterized it, in your quote above, as “lying about a sexual experience,” which is not against the law. It was the “under oath” thing that, if true, was a violation of the law. > > - Rick \*\* On the whole “under oath” thing. I think our presidents and memebers of congress take a little oath when sworn into office. I would say that everything they do while in office could be charicterized as being subject to that oath. I think with a little digging it could be proven that each and every one of them violates that oath at least weekly. the one from the Senate is typical: > [@](#): > > I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God. Well both houses of the legislature have just passed a law that is virtually identical to one deemed unconstitutional by the Supreame Court. I guess in my book that right there blows the oath for anybody who voted for it. This is not an isolated incident either. Many pols make points this way. They knowingly vote for a measure they know won’t pass muster. then when it is struck down they can go back to their constituency and say, “I voted for it but the EVIL Supreame Court shot it down.” Does knowingly voting for an unconstitutional measure for purely selfish ends, tying up the courts, costing the counrty millions in trying the case, etc, constitute supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States? Or even bearing true faith and allegiance to the same? I’ll leave that up to you. ---
**Author:** ![Binarydrone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Binarydrone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Binarydrone)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/77 "2003-06-05T19:20:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\*Binarydrone: > > Personally, I think about six months from the close of the war should be adequate for us to have a good idea of what the WMD situation is. \*\* So, pencil you in for [November 2, 2003?](http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=bush02&date=20030502&query=Bush%27s+Victory+Speech) That should be nice and close to the 04 campaign heating up. Should be fun. ---
**Author:** ![mack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b19c9b/32.png) [@mack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mack)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/78 "2003-06-05T19:27:40Z")
I couldn’t find a full transcript but I found this: > [@](#): > > “Look at the very people who are involved in this. They have popped up in other settings. The great story here for anybody willing to find it, write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president” I take this remark to mean something like “the people making these allegations are the same people that have been after my husband since he announced for president”. On that point I think she’s correct. [Timeline.](http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/clintime.htm) Nothing to apologize for. Regarding the allegations, she was wrong. Regarding the people behind them, she was right. So it’s a wash. And the conspiracy truly is vast. It all originated with[The British Oligarchy!](http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/britolig.htm) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/79 "2003-06-05T19:29:49Z")
**Scylla** , you are not helping yourself one bit, pal. **december** , that about sums it up, except for this: The war was predicated on Bush’s assertion that Iraq not only had the weapons, but that they were in a condition and quantity and state of control that represented _an imminent peril to the security of the United States requiring an immediate preventive invasion._ We now know he couldn’t have known that, nor even have honestly thought so. We already therefore _know_ he _lied_ about the most fundamental question about a leader’s most basic responsibility. The real situation on the ground at the time he did so is academic, since it didn’t have any influence on his decisionmaking. Fair enough? You’re right about this, though: It’s important for us to know. ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2003, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715/80 "2003-06-05T19:31:33Z")
> [@](#): > > Can I have that again in simple declarative sentences please? **Scylla** , I’m not **Elvis** , but I’ll give it a shot (I’m feeling brainy right now, is all. I need something to do). This is my interpretation of what **Elvis** is trying to say. If I’m wrong, so be it: " **Scylla** , you are willing to believe that the Monica story appeared out of thin air. Further you believe that it is unrelated to the rest of the indefensible (and even you have not defended it) Get Clinton for Something effort. This Monica story, as you believe and espouse, appeared whole and intact and pure as a gift from the Vindication Fairy. That much is touching. You would do better to face facts, even those that go against your preferred point of view. You would not be the first on this boards, but you can be the next. Until that time it’s more evidence of your willingness to hold slightly plausible belief as though it were reasonable." Again, if I’m reading that wrong, please feel free to disregard. I mean no ill will. I’m just seeing if I can clear it up. Sometimes y’all GD people forget to write sentences shorter than Cicero’s paragraphs:D [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-hillary-ever-apologize/179715.md?page=5)