>>You, like others, are not addressing the point I raised, which is why we should have spent a single thin dime to find out what we already knew?
>
>what, that he can't be trusted any further than we can throw him?

With regard to his sex life, at least. Was this big news to everyone? As far as honesty goes, should we really _trust_ any politician??

>he's still innocent til proven guilty, so we'd have to prove what we already know.

First, Starr's report proves nothing. It's just evidence. The only way to prove anything is to impeach him first. And that won't happen. Congress will not impeach a popular president.