Wednesday, December 9, 1998 -- 1:00 PM, WASHINGTON -- Following the contentiously called executive session (before which Jerry Nadler was unceremoniously cut off by gavel), Henry Hyde reconvened the Witch Trial Hearing.

He indicated that Abbe Lowell would be given two hours, followed by lunch (we wonder if GOP members are going to again feed upon each other), followed by David Schippers.

After a little procedural wrangling, Abbe Lowell began his presentation, first acknowledging the hard work of his staff.

His argument: the committee does not have Constitutional grounds to issue articles of impeachment. He cited Arthur Schlessinger's comment on lowering the bar on impeachment. He said he would review what is required to impeach, why the evidence does not meet those requirements, and how the very procedures of the committee should give them pause.

Point one: "Impeachment is not a means to punish the President [or] to send a message to our children... [nor is it] rebuke or censure." It is a judgment of Congress' conduct.

And Lowell brought his own taped evidence -- Peter Rodino saying that a committee should not vote articles on a partisan vote. Lowell admonished Hyde that his duty and that of the committee would not be served by a partisan vote, and that America does not want to see a vote in the Senate about sex.

He took a broadside at the committee for searching for reasons to impeach and lowering the burden of proof as a quasi-"Grand Jury," blaming the White House for not calling fact witnesses when it is their duty, and likening impeachable offenses to 'perjury by a basketball coach."

Lowell turned to the issue of a senate trial and the fact that the Senate would have to hear from witnesses -- surely a not-so-veiled hint that democrats would bring witnesses devastating to right-wing Republicans, even though he did not say it. Remember -- this is about Clinton's so-called "perjury" in the Jones deposition. What led up to that? Imagine Ruff or Kendall cross-examining Lucianne Goldberg, Matt Drudge, Stephen and Paula Jones, Donovan Campbell, John Whitehead and Richard Scaife.

Lowell went on to note that the closer that a vote of impeachment came, the further away from specific charges the committee went -- waiting until last evening to leak their four articles of impeachment.

He then tore into the "unspecified charges" after saying to Hyde "I know you and the committee are trying to be fair" -- a mollifying line after which he held up the articles as vague.

He also tore into the committee for piling on charges, repeating them over and over, such as the President allegedly trying to influence Lewinsky -- listing it as both abuse of power and (a stretch) perjury.

"In America, it should not have been our burden [to present fact witnesses]" -- at which point he "called" Monica Lewinsky, Betty Currie, and Kenneth Starr and the President to the stand -- as the camera panned to folders and books containing their testimony on the table.

The look of grave consternation on Hyde's face was not to be believed. we thought his eyes were about to pop out of their sockets.

And then he stole David Schippers' thunder by citing the Jones deposition -- and reminded the committee that the Jones lawyers and Tripp were planning to wreak havoc! He cited Judge Wright's comments pointing to the vagueness of the Jones lawyers' own sex definition -- then played the Jones depo tape!

What a joy -- listening to the JONES LAWYERS PARSING WORDS!

The GOP does not get it -- every time "damaging" evidence "against" Clinton is released to the public, Clinton's approval -- and, just as importantly, public disapproval of the congressional GOP members, right wing, Paula Jones, her attorneys and advisors.

And listening to Donovan Campbell lie to the judge -- "I'm trying to avoid asking the President salacious questions" -- was priceless!

Lowell resumed with the point that a full quarter-hour was spent parsing language -- mostly, we will point out, by the Jones goons -- and Judge Wright's comment that "It's just going to make it very difficult. If you want to know the truth, I don't think Clinton knows all these definitions anyway."

Add to that what we now know about the behind-the-scenes actions by Paula Jones and Linda Tripp, Lowell said, and you have a setup.

We know that politics and restraint prevent Lowell from coming out and saying "extorted perjury" -- but that was his point.

Lowell then played the portion of the Grand Jury depo at which Clinton discussed that moment in the depo -- and his insistence that he had told the truth.

Lowell then began picking apart the differences between Clinton's and Lewinsky's memory on dates and specifics of their relationship -- does America want to go through a Senate trial on these details?

He added that they now have the proof that shows there is no need to go forward with a Senate trial -- the definition of sexual relations was exclusive as Joe Cammarata had said in an interview on MSNBC.

He then played the audiotape of Linda Tripp and Monica Lewinsky, in which the latter said "We didn't have sex!... We didn't have intercourse!"

"Mr. Chairman, no one, certainly not Congress, Ms. Lewinsky and her family, wants further loss to her privacy." His real meaning: she will make fools of all of you -- especially Lindsey Graham.

He then asked the committee whether they were comfortable with a witness, Lewinsky, saying (again playing one of the Tripp tapes) "I've been a liar all my life... Yes, it's true. If I wanted money from my Dad, I had to make up a story."

How do we justify a senate trial into these matters, he asked?

Lowell ripped into the majority by saying that Clinton's failure to recall specifics under oath as an "abuse of power" -- comparing it to how Reagan could not remember flow of money to the "Contras." He said it was simply unfair -- then played clips of Starr's "I don't recall/to the best of my recollection/I am happy to now search my recollection/ [Lofgren] When did you first hear about a tape of a woman on tape... [Starr] I have no recollection/I don't know -- er I know what Miss Lewinsky said."

"See what an unfair tactic that is," said Lowell.

We almost missed it, we were laughing so hard!

Lowell then lit into the charges of abuse of power and obstruction of justice -- the job search, the gifts, the whole enchilada -- and cited Lewinsky's own Grand Jury testimony for the exculpatory evidence. "Do you need more facts?" he asked rhetorically -- then played the December 22 Tripp tape in which Tripp: "You told them you were going to lie, didn't you?" Monica: "No."

And Lowell than "called" Betty Currie to discuss the gifts, reading from one of her Grand Jury appearances -- testimony which undercuts Starr's argument that the gift concealment constituted an impeachable crime.

He charged Starr with "couching" evidence concerning the gifts in some form of buying witness silence or subornation of perjury -- when there was no cause to believe Currie was going to be called as a witness in the Jones case and in fact never was -- so where's the subornation? The article of impeachment has no legal ground on which to stand.

And again Lowell used Starr's own testimony against Starr and the committee on the charge about the gifts "that does not exist."

Lowell made fast work of the job search, which started well before the Lewinsky flap -- and lit into Linda Tripp for "suggesting" that Lewinsky get Jordan involved.

Lowell insisted Tripp owes Jordan an apology for that -- "and for this" -- playing the Tripp tape in which Tripp coached Lewinsky to coerce Jordan into helping him, and Lewinsky saying that Jordan did not know a thing about the affair!

Lowell then replayed his own questioning of Starr in which he admits to the fact that the job search started far earlier than would allow for allegations of wrongdoing -- including Starr's comment that :the President never explicitly asked her to lie."

Lowell blasted the committee for planning to depose -- then canceling on -- Bob Bennett in their trawl for evidence of abuse of power.

Lowell then accused the GOP members of "dressing up' the articles by declaring denials of a Lewinsky affair "using public resources" in an abusive way. "This article merely repeats in another form that the President wanted to conceal a sexual relationship... As my daughter would say, 'Duuuh!'"

Compare concealing Iran-Contra to concealing an affair, Lowell said again -- then brought up Sensenbrenner's contemptible comment that lying about bombing is no different than lying about an affair.

What can you make from the minority view that the evidence is so slight that the charges don't stand, asked Lowell -- again castigating the HJC for not calling witnesses, and added that it was inappropriate to ask Starr about the facts. Again playing a portion of Starr's testimony -- in which he said they were trying to stick to high standards and that he approved of it... and cut to Berman's question to which Starr had to admit that the grand jury had not approved the referral to Congress.

Lowell then challenged Starr's referral as not being fair, complete or unbiased. He made mention of the Espy trial -- and the judge tossing so many of Donald Smaltz's charges against Espy. Lowell questioned the conduct of Starr's staff -- strong-arm tactics, leaks -- but said he did not mean that Starr was a bad man, but operating under a bad law.

You have every reason as to question evidence presented with an opinion as Starr did, Lowell said -- pointing out that Jaworski presented evidence in Watergate with no opinion and inference -- "concocted false alibis" and "pattern of deception" are phrases that color Starr's evidence, and conclusions that offenses are impeachable are a conclusion -- something Jaworski would not do.

Lowell then played Starr giving two different stories about why he allowed Linda Tripp to go home and talk after her meeting with Starr -- he would not admit it to HJC, but sure did to ex-Nixon moll Diane Sawyer.

Having laid out his points, he then said that that was the reason he had asked so many questions of Starr that went to the heart of his office's conduct.

Lowell then cited the letters from Constitutional scholars and historians which argue that this impeachment would harm the nation, and the views of a number of panel witnesses -- suggesting that the committee was not proceeding in the spirit of the Constitution and were attempting to rewrite history.

"The House should not vote impeachments unlikely to be approved in the Senate," Lowell quoted from Labowitz's testimony, adding that Holtzman had testified that the Nixon-era HJC "voted as if they were the Senate" -- that is, to a higher-than-Grand-Jury standard.

Lowell then asked the question: if Nixon's lies about his taxes were not impeachable, how could Clinton's lies about sex be impeachable? He recounted Judge Wiggins' comment on the disproportionality of the current situation when compared with Watergate.

Lowell then contrasted the Watergate and Lewinsky judiciary committees -- showing how opposite in conduct they were, especially in the area of bipartisanship. "In these last sessions, this committee can rise [to] merge the portrait on the right with the left [portraits of chairmen Hamilton and Rodino]..." He urged that the committee listen to Hamilton's plea that the committee hold themselves to the highest and fairest standards, which concluded his testimony.

Conyers thanked Lowell, and Hyde gaveled the session to a close at 12:46 PM.

At 2:12 PM, Bobby Scott (D-VA) opened the afternoon session and tried to get in a motion which again asked for a delineation of the charges against President Clinton. He points out that Roll Call had the charges before the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee did. Well, that was no surprise -- the GOP staffers on the Committee leak to their favorite news sources, as do some in the White House. Scott said he didn't know what witnesses to call and threatens that if there are no witnesses called "then we cannot go forward."

What did he mean? Are the Democrats going to walk out -- as they should? Let's wait and see. Hyde claimed that the Democrats could have called any witnesses they wished, but now the scope has not expanded in any way from the Starr report and so -- too bad.

We think that the President's counsel this morning opened up an entirely new facet of this investigation -- whether Ken Starr committed perjury before the committee and whether he is guilty of abuse of power and tampering with evidence through his incredible dicing of testimony to fit his referral -- a referral that was not supposed to be an indictment, yet was.

Scott goes on about the President's right to adequate judicial review of these charges. Hyde interrupted him on time expiration, and then begins to say that we did call Mr. Ruff ... and then he was cut off. Scott's proposal is defeated -- of course. Scott asked for a roll call. Hyde says okay.

Naturally it was a party line vote.

Schleppers -- oops! we mean Schippers -- was up again. The burly, surly truckdriver of a man -- whose brother is one of the most important Democrats in the nation -- began his supportive lies for Starr. Why Schippers, a Democrat himself, sold his soul to take his place in history as just another whore for the unseen hands guiding this lynch mob we'll never know. Schleppers, as he did with Starr, nearly made love to his staff as he delivered "I we them everything . . " speech. One does this when they know they are perceived as evil and want to blur the focus.

He goes on to say he respects the office of the President more than it is possible to say -- even though he was about to lynch Bill Clinton on behalf of a group of people who have only one thing on their minds - greed.

"It is my solemn duty to accuse William Jefferson Clinton for perjury, obstruction of Justice ... blah. blah ...and, believe it or not, lying to the Congress of the United States!" Ha, ha, haha -- if it wasn't so embarrassing, we'd laugh.

If this was only about sex we would not be here -- but his relationship with Lewinsky shows what he is. We are paraphrasing here. ----> He says Lewinsky showed the president her thong, and instead of turning her in, he invited her into a private office to kiss her. He invited her back and she fellated him. After she moved from the White House to the Pentagon, she came in under the guise of visiting Betty Currie. They were alone on at least 21 occasions and had nearly a dozen phone sex encounters and 55 phone conversations. He gave her 24 presents and she gave him 40 presents.

What a prick.

Things calmed down. Then in December 1997 things began to unravel. "I do not intend to discuss the sexual details ... but they are highly relevant because the President repeatedly lied about them before the Grand Jury and to this Committee. He has said that she did him, but he didn't do her. That contradicts Lewinksy testimony and a few friends of hers.

Ha, ha, haha -- so what. We guess that's proof!

The evidence and testimony must be viewed as a HOLE, we mean whole - he said. He claims that compartmentalizing it is the way criminal defense lawyers fool you. We all agree that Lewinsky testified that no one ever promised me a job, or told me to lie. "OF course no one said, "Monica -- Go in there and lie. They didn't have to, she knew what was expected of her. The didn't promise her a job, of course not - but she got one once she signed her false affidavit.

The Schleppers told some story about WW II -- like every old fart on earth.

If you can believe it -- Schleppers thinks that Lewinsky's conduct is proof positive that the President subverted the law.

He says the truth is not decided by hundreds of scholars, polls or anything but the truth. "And you know more than most." Ha, ha, haha -- the secret garden.

He then quotes Andrew Jackson -- an adulterer himself.

"The final act in this sordid drama ... " -- is this guy for real?

Let's look at the record:

12/5/97 -- Monica wants to see Bill the next day. Later she saw the President at a XMAS party. LAter Paula Jones faxed a list of witnesses to the President's attorney. Lewinsky did not see it for 10 days. she then wrote a letter terminated her relationship with Bill.

12/6/97 -- The guards told her that Bill was meeting with Eleanor Mondale. She left in a huff and called Curries -angry. Later Currie told the guards that the President wa so mad he wanted someone fired. The president was very angry and told her that no one had ever treated him as poorly as she had -- Clinton admitted this. But then he invited her to visit him that same day. Now he was sweet she said. Then he told her that he would talk to Jordan about getting a job. Curries then told some officers that if they kept quiet -- no one would lose their job. The captain of the guard said the Pres. told him -- I hope I can count on your discretion. Schleppers then repeats some more hearsay -that nothing like this had happened in 14 years. (pitiful)

The president said he didn't remember what we said to Captain Purdie twice under oath.

Now Schleppers gets so confusing we cannot follow the trail. He says that if the President testified truthfully , he knew about the witness list before his 5 PM Dec 6th meeting with Lewinsky. Why? Because "now she could hurt him" is the intimation.

On Nov. 5 -- Monica met with JOrdan, and he made no effort to find a job for her -- and he didn't remember this first meeting. Nothing happened in November, but at her meeting with the President on the 6th, she mentioned this and the President kind of said -- Ah, I 'll get on it.

Jordan remembered the second meeting. He called two prospective employers - he called the president to report his progress. What happened to change the search from a low to a high priority. "Oh yes something happened." Judge Wright ordered that Paula Jones could get information on anyone who was a state or federal employee and had sex with the president.

On Dec 17th the President called "in the wee hours of the morning" and told her that she was on the witness list. He told her that seeing her name "broke his heart" -- then Schleppers adds "I bet it did" snidely.

The President mentioned the affidavit. He did not say go in and lie, but you could always say you were coming in to see Betty or to bring me papers.

We must stop here. This man Schippers is one of the most vile people you would ever want to meet. We wish you could hear his tone, his sneering, holier than though attitude. In fact, what he is saying is that the President, hounded for years by those seeking to "get something" on him -- was a subject for blackmail -- judicial blackmail by Starr , but at the direction of others. After four years, they finally found his ankle. Then they set a trap -- knowing he would be humiliated and would lie about the circumstances of his affair with Lewinsky -- as would most any man. Then they waited and sprang the trap. What was it? Getting the President of the United States in front of a Grand Jury to lie about sex.

Yet Schleppers makes this sound so terrible, such a horrible injury to the nation, to the world.

It is so pitiful, so awfully pitiful.

Schleppers, a hired gun, and a bad one at that -- sitting on his big fat sweaty ass accusing a man with frailties far fewer than his of a trumped up high crime.

It makes one want to give up his citizenship.

What a crude man Schippers is, and what vile men sit on that high dais ruling so smugly . wrapped in the cloak of the constitution, that cape concealing the dagger of hypocrisy and the sword of falsehood.

Schippers moves over the details like a plumber chattering away while roto-rooting a toilet. He is proud of himself and his craft - so proud in fact that he does not realize how vile he appears, how un-American, how venal. He appears as a rapist of everything meaningful to Americans.

But we should forgive him. For he has, most obviously, spent his life in courtrooms empty of justice -- except for the powerful or the rich. Those long years spent poisoning the system, participating in injustice and trying in vain to claw himself toward another rung has left him dead a compassionless corpse, not just willingly participating in a lynching, but zealously attempting to be its star actor.

It is impossible to write here, all the

One of the most blatant efforts to obstruct justice occurred when Lewinsky was subpoenaed about a hat pin. Lewinsky suggested she give the gifts to Ms. Currie and the President answered "I don't know . . or let me think about it." Currie said that Monica called her. Monica said the opposite. Ms. Currie is lying -- or so says Schleppers. He then dramatically puts up a chart of Currie's cell phone bill which shows the call to Lewinsky. But Schleppers can't prove that, because she could have called Lewinsky for any reason -- like telling her she was on the way to the Watergate -- to pick up the gifts which Lewinsky asked her to do.

But Schleppers doesn't offer this account -- he presents only his theory - that it was the President who ordered Currie to do it. Ha, ha, haha -- what a riot.

What Schleppers is doing is offering tall stories to fit facts. -- An old trick used by prosecutors.

Why did the President give her more gifts?

Schleppers then goes on to trip himself up: He says the president testified that he told Lewinksy that "they will subpoena every woman I've ever known." Then says that the president denied talking with Lewinsky about her own subpoena.

Schleppers claims that the President said he didn't want to see her false affidavit and this is true. But Schleppers trumps up this story - he didn't have to see, he'd seen 15 of them already! Another drama, made up "facts" to conform with Starr's homosexual-enraged referral.

Lewinsky showed Jordan her false affidavit -- Why? says Schleppers - so Jordan could call the President to say "the deed had been done."

Jordan soon thereafter called Ron Perelman -- and the next day Monica received her rewarding for signing a false affidavit. Jordan called Currie and told her -- tell the President -- "Mission Accomplished," Perelman said Jordan had never called him about a job before. Jordan said he did including Mayor David Dinkins of NY. This "proves" that it was a payoff to Lewinsky.

Jordan says he did not wonder about Monica's qualifications -- yet he told Perelman that she was a bright young girl -- Ha, ha, haha- Wow that proves he's a liar.

"Do people like Vernon Jordan go to the wall for "marginal employees" - No, he did it at the direction of the President!"

Lewinsky false affidavit said that she had never had a "sexual relationship" with the Presdient. She deleted a reference to never being alone with the President.

Now wait a minute, we say. If that is what her "false affidavit" read -- then maybe it wasn't so false. If Lewinsky considered intercourse "sexual relations" -- she was not lying at all. But Starr scared her to death, convincing her that she could be convicted of perjury -- and all the time -- she would not have! That, perhaps is the only news we hard from Schleppers that has any meat.

Schleppers drones on.

Schleppers now sneers that the President had practiced for his deposition. "Take a look at this tape that's coming up. Something the President of the United States doesn't want the people of the United States to EVER see. Watch" Do you think for one moment after watching that tape - that the President wasn't listening? Ha, ha, haha -- it didn't look like he gave a damn.

"He still wasn't able to tell the truth -- It depends what the meaning of "Is" is. That, more than anything, shows "his own crafty mind". Can you imagine dealing with should a person in any important matter. He would just change the meaning to suit his purpose.

Now Schleppers tries to squirm out by admitting "the sexual relationship" trap -- not for Clinton -- but for him. What he is urging is that we should lynch the President for being smarter than the extortionist lawyers trying to shake him down for 2.6 million dollars for a trailer park whore. The President could answer yes, and answer yes truthfully -- - but Schleppers says it is patently false. Then Schleppers points out that Monica touched one of the body parts enumerated by the Jones lawyers as edited by Judge WRight -- so that makes him a liar as well!!!! Ha, ha, haha, haha, ha- Does Schippers know what a fool he sounds like Does he think that Americans didn't think the President was lying? Ha, ha, haha -- the pitiful man.

Schleppers turns to another tale -- which he and Starr fabricated to fit the few "facts" they had. This time is was about the meeting with Betty Currie. "He made sure it was a face to face meeting. He made sure she was in his office to establish his power" Ha, ha, haha, haha, ha. "He wasn't interested in what she knew -- He didn't want to be contradicted by his personal secretary. You don't make declarative statements about a situation that the person doesn't know anything about."

Of Lord. We are rolling on the floor.

"It was witness tampering -- pure and simple." hisses Schleppers.

Schippers then said, in a most pompous tone, that he would now address abuse of power.

Given Schippers' spurious claims to that point, he was one to talk.

Schippers made it out that Clinton's using the powers of his office to block a lawsuit was an abuse of power, making a claim that it was the deprive Jones of justice.

The problem for Schippers is that his argument that the suit was to gain some kind of justice for Jones is questionable in and of itself. it was Jones and her partisan allies who abused the civil justice system.

He then claimed that Clinton used his office to attack Jones' credibility. Horse hockey -- she did a far better job than any President could have done when on at least five occasions she contradicted her own sworn claims against clinton under questioning from Bob Bennett. oh -- we forgot -- that's not germane to the case for impeachment.

Or is it?

Schippers recounted reports that Lewinsky had been characterized as a "stalker" by the White House, in an effort to imply that the White House was passing around stories that were meant to defame Lewinsky -- which might hold water were it not for the fact that there were many in the White House who feared that Monica's behavior was a few steps beyond inappropriate.

Schippers enumerated a number of areas where the President was not fully candid with his staff and continued to cover up a relationship with Lewinsky. Any idiot knows that he wanted to protect his dignity, his family, his privacy and that of Monica.

But when Schippers recounted the testimony of well-known john, backstabber and spin doctor Dick Morris, whose testimony about consulting with the president and allegedly taking a poll about how the public would react to truth and lies coming from the President.

Schippers believes Morris? Two-thirds of Republicans laugh at the man -- a self-serving, scandal-tainted pollster not even they trust.

It was especially funny that Schippers followed by enumerating all sorts of press reports implying that Monica had problems and acted like a stalker -- of course, Schippers has no proof that these came from Clinton, even though he asserted "these rumors came from the White House." He wanted to imply that these were circulated to defame Monica -- despite evidence indicating what can politely be called more than an element of truth in them!!

Schippers turned back to the grand jury testimony to "prove" that Clinton claimed he was telling the truth to his staff -- but the segment he showed had the President clearly saying that he was using careful wording with his staff that was true, but misleading. Schippers recounted that Podesta said Clinton denied sexual relations in any way whatsoever.

But Schippers forgets that oral sex is quite arguably not sexual relations. He is trying to spin accepted definitions and parse words himself. he would be laughed out of court. Some abuse of power.

Schippers began his final summation by saying he had "avoided use of interviewees' because they were under oath. What a weasel -- could it have to do with something called "exculpation?"

Schippers turned to Lowell's arguments, claiming that the matter should just be dropped and all should go back to "politics as usual."

Did we hear him right when he said "it is a fundamental precept that an impeachable offense not be a criminal act." -- or was that a slip?

Schippers claimed that Lowell and the president's defenders claim that a "subjective standard" is a defense for perjury -- completely misrepresenting the opposing position. But this is business as usual for Schi[ppers and the GOPers -- their entire claim of impeachable offenses is based on misrepresentation.

"For the President to advance the subjective belief that he did not have sexual relations" is ridiculous, said Schippers.

Hold it right there -- does that mean Judge Wright's definition of sex is subjective, too? What an illogical assertion -- meant only to mollify Clinton-haters.

Schippers turned back to Lewinsky's false affidavit, which he claimed -- supported by a ridiculous ruling -- could have had a negative effect on the Jones case. Well, gosh -- didn't Judge wright eventually rule Lewinsky was not material to the case? And who's to blame for the false affidavit? Tripp -- maybe Jones could have sued her for messing up her "big payday" had the President not settled!

Schippers also claimed that the Democrats and white House had called Hyde "unfair" -- then asked if it was fair to friends of the White House to call Jones names? Or for them to propogate damaging stories about Lewinsky's mental stability? Once again, Schippers brought up "that dress," which "proved" Lewinsky's claim.

What a fool -- think about this: what kind of woman keeps a "souvenir" like that in the first place? Sure, Lewinsky, like many young men and women, did some stupid things -- and now people like Schippers and Lindsey Graham are using a young woman who made mistakes to their own evil, corrupt means.

Schippers then turned to the criticism of Starr -- that "they' say he's putting the country through this -- and then said "Who's putting the country through this? The President."

Buffalo pies -- it takes more than two to tango in a situation like this.

After droning on for differences between the starr report and the defense report, Schippers outlined a litany of "differences," asserting but not proving that the president was again deceiving.

But he blundered yet again when he turned to a tape excerpt played by Abbe Lowell. He claimed it was taken "out of context" -- and read the following section, which was still exculpatory of the President! If anything, it reinforced that tripp was leading Lewinsky on in asking "Didn't you establish that [yadda yadda]" -- funny how tripp sounds more like an investigator or -- dare we say it -- prosecutor than a friend engaged in girl talk?

Schippers went on to once again lambaste the "arrogance" of the White House and their defense team, and claimed again the Payola Jones was "thwarted by perjurious statements."

Well, that's one way to look at it -- if you ignore Jones' own perjury in her initial sworn claim that she backed off from once cross-examined.

Schippers started whining about a President needing "prestige" and "confidence" -- quoting from a brief filed in the Jones case. And it's true -- Schippers reminded us again that the Jones case was an attack on the prestige and esteem of the presidency.

When will she apologize for the damage she has done to our nation?

Schippers claimed that "every unanswered assault" on the judicial system -- perjury -- "has lasting effects." What a whopper -- in that case, there are literally thousands of such assaults per day! Don't forget that the prime job of a jury is bull-oney detector -- to determine if witnesses, attorneys, prosecutors and cops are being honest.

Schippers' claims that Clinton has no respect for the legislative branch were also a riot.

He wrapped up by saying we were at a "crossroad" -- "admiration from the world and moral leadership." What a stooge -- we are being laughed at by the world for our "new Moralism" and the damage it does to our international esteem.

"This is a defining moment for the Presidency... if you do not impeach... the bar will be so high that no House of Representatives will ever impeach again... only a convicted felon or a traitor will be impeached."

What a load of crap. He then invoked the name of, among others, Peter Rodino.

Schippers should be ashamed. Ashamed for being a puppet of one of the most seditious railroadings in American history.

Schippers invoked the concepts of "honor and truth."

He lacks the former, he has little respect for the latter in his twisting of the facts.

And after reading a trite little poem about a "ship of state" which he called "sublime and uplifting."

Thank God he was done.

This was Schleppers three hours of fame, his moment -- his chance to make a couple of million off a book -- maybe even a seat on the Federal District Court, and he had played it for everything it was worth -- like a man who has sold his soul to the devil. Schleppers ranted, nearly drooling with venom. Unlike the effeminate Starr, Schleppers flaunts his bulldog frame cloaked in a cheap yellow shirt to match his cheap language and his bosses -- a claque of twitter, drawling punks that call themselves Congressman but are really agents of the highest bidders.