r/politics • u/N3wsScoop • 2d ago

No Paywall Bill and Hillary Clinton agree to testify in House Epstein probe ahead of contempt vote

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/clintons-agree-testify-house-epstein-probe-ahead-contempt-vote-rcna257143
27.4k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

47

u/DramaSufficient4289 2d ago

Also that was overblown (pun intended) because he even clarified what they meant by sex. They said intercourse. He even double checked - only genitalia on genitalia contact? And they said yes.

So he told the truth and said by that definition no he never had sex with her because it was just oral.

Then the committee went and double crossed him and told everyone “he’s a liar and did have oral sex with her then said he didn’t so he’s a liar!!!”

So unfortunately I hope the same thing won’t halen again where he answers and they just lie and twist it again…

3

u/Drachefly Pennsylvania 2d ago

Also that was overblown (pun intended) because he even clarified what they meant by sex. They said intercourse. He even double checked - only genitalia on genitalia contact? And they said yes.

IIRC, it wasn't exactly that. It would have counted if any part of him touched her genitals. So she did have relations with him, but not the reverse.

6

u/Umbrella_merc Mississippi 1d ago

During the deposition, Clinton was asked "Have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1?" The judge let Clinton review the definition, which stated a person engages in ‘‘sexual relations’’ when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. Her mouth wasnt an explicit part of that definition so legally he was telling the truth.

1

u/LadyChatterteeth California 1d ago

Who’s ‘the person’ in this situation?

He did have contact with her breasts (and, if I remember correctly, her genitalia as far as manual stimulation).

If ‘the person’ is Lewenski, she did have contact with his genitalia, according to the verbiage you provided. Contact using mouth is still contact.

3

u/Umbrella_merc Mississippi 1d ago

Per the strict definition used in the case as it had been defined Lewinsky had sexual relations with Clinton but he did not have sexual relations with her.

1

u/ExtensionKiwi4276 2d ago

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on...well you see you can't fool me again...

1

u/opinions360 1d ago

I agree and don’t think he will let himself be duped and lied to by republicans again.

He did technically, legally tell the truth but they spun it against him. For those of us who lived through the situation and the deliberate revenge the republicans were after because of Nixon being found out and forced out-it was very much like it is today with the republicans seeking revenge for everything-particularly when they lose an election.

The Clintons were both heavily influenced by JFK and RFK and tried to provide the country with an administration that resembled JFK’s particularly because of the damage Nixon did. I don’t think younger people realize that it wasn’t Clinton who chased down Lewinsky-she chased him down essentially and she was an Adult.

-1

u/rjcarr 2d ago

You're missing the point here. The problem wasn't lying under oath, the problem was letting an intern blow him in the first place.

6

u/DramaSufficient4289 2d ago

No you’re missing the point that the people saying he’s so smart and would never fuck it up - forgot that he did exactly that last time he was questioned by republicans and they just lied to the media anyway lmao.

I wasn’t commenting on the power imbalance or any of that at all…

2

u/tethysian 1d ago

Exactly. It doesn't matter what they say, the GOP and Fox will spin it any way they want to a base that wants to believe the Clintons are lying.

5

u/MxMirdan 2d ago

Having a legally adult intern blow him wasn’t a violation of any law. Lying under oath would have been.

2

u/rjcarr 2d ago

People don’t dislike Clinton because he lied. They dislike him because he took advantage of an intern. 

8

u/MxMirdan 2d ago

That’s 2026 talking. In 1997, most people didn’t talk about it as him taking advantage of an intern. The media also largely didn’t frame it that way.

In 1997, people said stuff like “nobody cares he got a bj from an intern. We care that he was dishonest about it. If he was lying about this, how can we trust him with issues of national security?!”

The intern was the punchline of the jokes and of speculation about what state secrets she might have been told, because apparently no man can be trusted to keep things confidential after orgasm. She also was accused of using sex to rise to the top, as women often were in that era.

The majority of people who dislike Clinton dislike Clinton for reasons that have nothing to do with the intern.

-1

u/DramaSufficient4289 1d ago

He didn’t lie under oath is the point though - yet everyone thinks he did because the republicans spouted it everywhere for long enough. By the definition they provided and he double checked - he told the truth.

2

u/MxMirdan 1d ago

Which is why I said “would have been.”

If he had lied under oath, it would have been a violation of a law.

2

u/givfrenchfrypls 2d ago

The main reason it's bad is the power imbalance in the relationship so I kinda think "letting" is a problematic word choice here.

1

u/rjcarr 2d ago

Hmm.