As a lawyer I think the only truly shameful event in this entire story was the court ruling that a President could be sued while in office. I wonder what people think about this: during the Cuban missile crisis, JFK was scheduled to give a campaign speech. He couldn't go becuase he was busy saving the world from thermonuclear war. Of course he couldn't tell people that, so he lied and said he had a cold. Let me emphasize that that was a baldfaced outright lie.

Now, if he had been forced to give a deposition (which would have been outrageous in those days), he could have chosen either to (a) tell the truth and immediately cause worldwide panic and possibly dash all hope of a diplomatic solution to the crisis, or (b) lie, in which case he would have committed an impeachable offense. If you were JKennedy, what would you do? Lie or tell the truth?

Please note that I am not suggesting that Clinton's lies were analogous. I'm just saying that, doesn't it scare you just a little that our Presidents can now be sued and have to give sworn testimony while in office? Are we not risking a JFK situation in which some future competent President has to choose between telling a lie that helps our country (like JFK did) or obstructing justice and setting himself up for impeachment?

(This is a personal commnt. My views are not necessarily the view of my employer...)