Letter: Clinton vs puritans

Letter: Clinton vs puritans

Sir: It is not the sex, but the principle: that the Executive obstructed the Judiciary - deliberately misleading them and the American people under oath.The fact that the President may have avoided the precise legal definition of perjury is not directly relevant to the question of impeachment, which is more broadly contingent upon acts tending to undermine the Constitution.

The semantic smokescreen behind which the President hid depended upon who touched whose genitals - and so also upon Ms Lewinsky's denial of a sexual relationship. Thus the President's concealment relied upon testimony which he knew to be perjury even by his own interpretation.

The President is sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, with its deliberately constructed checks and balances, including those between the Judiciary and the Executive. Yet he (at least) took advantage of an act he knew to be illegal to obstruct a judicial investigation into his own conduct.

The question is not, would you trust this man with your daughter; but rather, would you trust him with the Constitution?

GERARD M BLAIR

Fort Collins, Colorado, USA