Lessons From Disbarment

In eight months President Clinton will no longer be President. While it is unlikely that he will disappear quietly into contemplative retirement, no one expects him to hang up a shingle and practice law in Arkansas. In all likelihood, he will continue to do what he does best, raise money from celebrities and pursue his one sincerity: the feigning of sincerity. The question of whether Clinton is disbarred from the Arkansas Bar for misrepresentation under oath and obstruction of justice is, thus, entirely symbolic. At this point, the incident serves best as an illustration of the tactics Clinton has used throughout his political career to obscure the truth and survive political scandal.

Pretend the Facts are Still in Question

In spite of evidence to the contrary, the Clinton method is to pretend that the facts of the case are not what they appear to be. In his own words, you "deny, deny, deny" until it is impossible to deny any longer. For example, it was not until the infamous stained dress provided DNA evidence that Clinton retreated from his original denial extending from February 1998 to August 1998 and finally admit to an "improper" relationship with an intern.

In the present disbarment case, Clinton has his lawyers arguing that Clinton did not technically tell a falsehood under oath. However, Federal Judge Susan Webber Wright in her referral of his case to the ethics committee of the Arkansas Supreme Court averred that

"It is not acceptable to employ deceptions and falsehoods in an attempt to obstruct the judicial process ... [n]evertheless, the President's ...conduct in this case, coming as it did from a member of the bar and the chief law enforcement officer of this Nation, was without justification and undermined the integrity of the judicial system."

The judge concluded that Clinton had misled the court, was deliberately deceitful, and attempted to obstruct justice and Clinton did not contest the judgment. He just paid the $90,000 fine imposed by the judge. Now that the matter has been referred to the Arkansas ethics committee, the facts are no longer in doubt. Clinton declined to avail himself of his opportunity to appeal the judge's decision. He elected not to contest Judge Wright's conclusions in a court where he might actually be bound by the requirement of having to offer proof. The absolutely only question still open is the severity of the punishment. However, as long as you pretend the facts are in question, as long as you can drag out the proceedings, the greater the possibility that the public will forget, be confused by, or tire of the case. It is not the big lie that is effective, but small incremental mendacity that in tiny drops erodes not only the truth, but even concern for the truth.

Go To Page: 1 2 3