http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/nation/649359 Aug. 29, 2000, 8:24PM -- Clinton says disbarment is too harsh LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- President Clinton said Tuesday he should not be disbarred over his testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, telling a state judge that losing his law license is too harsh a penalty. In a five-page response to a complaint filed by the Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct, the president said he would not receive such a stiff sanction if his case were handled like similar cases. "On the basis of the relevant facts, the governing law and the applicable decisions of the Arkansas courts, ... a sanction of disbarment would be excessively harsh, impermissibly punitive and unprecedented in the circumstances of this case," Clinton's lawyers wrote. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Leon Johnson said he had expected to receive Clinton's filing Tuesday but otherwise would not discuss the case, including when it might be scheduled for a hearing or trial. The state conduct committee says the president lied about his relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky when asked about it, under oath, in January 1998. Jones' lawyers asked the president about Lewinsky while a federal judge presided over his deposition. In a lawsuit filed against Clinton June 30, the conduct committee's prosecutor accused the president of lying to spare himself embarrassment. In the response filed Tuesday, Clinton's lawyers acknowledged that the president was attempting to save face. Marie-Bernarde Miller, the prosecutor, would not comment on Clinton's filing. What do you think. Is disbarrment too harsh? ------------------ Stay Cool...
It would only be fair if they dis-barred every other lawyer who lied. ------------------ RocketFuel is dead!
It would only be fair if they dis-barred lawyers who have been CONVICTED of comtempt of court and obstruction of justice. Lawyer or not, the President of the United States is NOT above the law. ------------------ Houston Rockets Forever!! In Rudy We Trust
The thing is, though, that similar cases have apparently not led to disbarment for the lawyers involved. Since the precedent is to not disbar such lawyers, it would be too harsh to single out Clinton for disbarment. There are lesser penalties the State Bar can use. I'm no fan of Clinton myself, but unless disbarment is the norm in these cases, it doesn't make sense to be more harsh on Clinton just because he is the President. The President is not above the law but he shouldn't necessarily be held to a higher standard in this case, either. ------------------ HoustonSportsBoard.com
I say leave it up to the Arkansas bar association to decide. They seem to think that the punishment is appropiate. If Clinton's only arguement is that everybody does it or what we(he and Monica) did was not sex so I didn't really lie, than he deserves what he gets. He misled a Grand Jury investigation for God's sakes. There are people in jail right now for that very thing and his lawyers say that being disbarred is harsh?!? ------------------ Houston Rockets Forever!! In Rudy We Trust [This message has been edited by Dennis2112 (edited August 30, 2000).] [This message has been edited by Dennis2112 (edited August 30, 2000).]
Seriously, though, what would we expect his lawyers to say? Regardless of the charge, the defendant's lawyers are supposed to fight the charges. I don't think we could've expected his lawyers to say, "Yep. Disbarment sounds good. We're getting off easy with that." I don't think they'll end up disbaring Clinton when all is said and done, but some sort of sanctions wouldn't surprise me. ------------------ HoustonSportsBoard.com
