Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Point-Counterpoint: Kay Bailey Hutchinson vs. Kay Bailey Hutchinson on "Perjury"

In an effort to make this blog fair and balanced, I am attempting to get more than one point of view into the discussions on here. Fortunately for me, I only need to look to one person to get both points of view! :-) Today's guest will be Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R), where she debates herself on the seriousness of a perjury charge. ***It might be inportant to note that one Hutchinson quote was taken while Clinton was President, and one Hutchinson quote was taken in the anticipation of Karl Rove being indicted for perjury. Can you guess which one is which? :-)

* * * * * * * * * * * *
JOHNNY COUGAR: Ok, Ms. Hutchinson, let's start with you. What are your views on the seriousness of perjury? HUTCHINSON:
The edifice of American jurisprudence rests on the foundation of the due process of law. The mortar in that foundation is the oath. Those who seek to obstruct justice weaken that foundation, and those who violate the oath would tear the whole structure down. Every day, thousands of citizens in thousands of courtrooms across America are sworn in as jurors, as witnesses, as defendants. On those oaths rest the due process of law upon which all of our other rights are based. The oath is how we defend ourselves against those who would subvert our system by breaking our laws. There are Americans in jail today because they violated that oath. Others have prevailed at the bar of justice because of that oath. What would we be telling Americans -- and those worldwide who see in America what they can only hope for in their own countries -- if the Senate of the United States were to conclude: The President lied under oath as an element of a scheme to obstruct the due process of law, but we chose to look the other way? I cannot make that choice. I cannot look away. I vote `Guilty' on Article I, Perjury. I vote `Guilty' on Article II, Obstruction of Justice. I ask unanimous consent an analysis of the Articles of Impeachment be printed in the Record.
JOHNNY COUGAR: Hmmmm...an interesting argument, Kay. Now let's see what you have to say nearly 7 years later. HUTCHINSON:
I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn’t indict on the crime so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation were not a waste of time and dollars.
JOHNNY COUGAR: Wow. We certainly have attained our goal here at truth > lies. Those are really different viewpoints. Thank you for your time, Ms. Hutchinson, and we'd like to welcome you back for more fair and balanced coverage on truth > lies!

4 Comments:

At 10/26/2005 11:16:00 AM, Blogger Airdale said...

JOHNNY COUGAR: Wow. We certainly have attained our goal here at truth > lies. Those are really different viewpoints. Thank you for your time, Ms. Hutchinson, and we'd like to welcome you back for more fair and balanced coverage on truth > lies!

 
At 10/26/2005 11:18:00 AM, Blogger Airdale said...

what a pain in the ass for posting reply rules!
guess my name is Airdale

 
At 10/26/2005 01:47:00 PM, Blogger JohnnyCougar said...

Airdale said...
what a pain in the ass for posting reply rules!
guess my name is Airdale


Sorry bout the reply difficulties. I wish I could get threaded discussion on here. And I have to turn "word verification" on, otherwise spam-bots start making comments on my theads!

Welcome Airdale!

 
At 10/26/2005 04:12:00 PM, Blogger Robola said...

Now she's blaming those damn liberal groups for apparently making her say perjury is just a technicality. When will those damn liberals learn...

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home