I guess it depends who a president is lying to.
Obviously the highest standard is under oath in a court of Law. But outside that?
In the UK if a Prime Minister tells lies when speaking in Parliament they are toast. There is a high standard for set for public integrity. Quite different from the US or France or other countries that have a somewhat deferential respect for high office, especially a Presidency with its executive power.
However, there are ways around this and UK politicians know the tricks. They are trained to choose their words very carefully, many have legal training. Blair was very good at this, carefully selecting the advice given to him by the civil service, the permanent government officials who are supposed to be independent of politics. Ensuring that the advice given is consistent with what he wanted to say in the first place.
So if it was a big lie, then it was simply a case of having received bad advice from officials who make mistakes. Blair used this technique to take the country to war in Iraq stating that he had information that there was a clear and present danger of weapons of mass destruction, what he did not say is was based in a handful of intelligence reports of very dubious quality. Instead he and his advisors ‘sexed up’ an intelligence dossier to make it sound as if James Bond had discovered a Saddam missiles full of chemical weapons were poised ready for launch within minutes. It was a lie, but when it was exposed that such weapons could not be found after the country was invaded, Blair was suitably astonished that the intelligence reports were untrue. But he could not be criticised for acting on the evidence presented to him, as far as the record was concerned he acted responsibly in the national interest. Blair was known as ‘Teflon’ Tony - no charge would stick. But his previously good reputation was tainted by the mess created by Iraq.
Clinton was also a smart operator, a lawyer. His performance during the long Star Investigation into his behaviour with the intern Monica Lewinsky rested on nuanced and carefully argued legal interpretations what sexual relations meant.
Smart ass politicians can get away with telling lies by these dubious means.
Trump is not in the same league. He is not a smart political operator and runs a chaotic administration in the same mercurial manner as his business enterprises. He knows and cares little of the political system and his support base likes that, they voted for someone to disrupt the system that they felt ignored them. His only political skill is on the campaign trail, making boastful speeches and lambasting opponents. His untruths are legendary and no-one can rely on anything he says because he is inconsistent. But, it seems you can say almost anything when campaigning. It is all opinion, mostly unsupported by facts. He has learned that many voters respond to simple emotion issues and are convinced by the reality TV show big business guy persona he has cultivated is what the country needs.
I remember one Trump supporter being asked about Trumps many untruths. Their reply was that ‘they all lie’. This will undoubtedly true. Trump is simply rather more barefaced about it and responds by accusing the media of being bigger liars. So a shortage of truth all around from political leaders or just too many versions of it and voters who expect lies and don’t seem to mind as long a president says the things the voters want to hear.
If he has to appear in court of law the rules will be different. Trump is well aware that he could not survive being questioned in the same manner Clinton was during the Starr investigation. He will face that with the Mueller investigation after they are done with his associates.
Trump has a lot of experience being sued and suing people and he must have employed a lot of lawyers. However, how he will perform when questioned directly under oath as President in front of some of the most senior lawyers in the country, will be interesting. It is not a dispute between companies,he cannot counter sue them when investigating treasonous collusion with Russia to undermine the US. All his words will matter and this is someone who finds it difficult to stick to a script.
I expect we will see the back of him before he is put on the spot and made to tell the truth about his misdeeds in a legal setting. He will know when the game is up, just like Nixon and Clinton. :dubious:
