In hindsight, was the persecution of Pres Bill meerely a tool?

[hootinholler]

It just occurred to me that the persecution of President Bill might have been a strategy to eliminate the special prosecutor law?

I'm *really* not up to speed on what/how that happened, as in its history (when/how enacted and when/how it disappeared). Can you guys give me some pointers to bring me up to speed?

-Hoot

[NAO]

1. It was to neutralize his second term agenda

let's learn from history.

[hootinholler]

3. Thus the question....

Can you provide some pointers so I can educate myself?

-Hoot

[NationalEnquirer]

8. Exactamundo.

What they couldn't do via the ballot box, they did with the "impeachment"..

[bobbieinok]

2. I've thought that for some time......so many years and so much $$$

and so much talktalktalk......people got fed up......when it came time to renew the law, congress voted no

laying the groundwork, planning the $$$ grabs, etc.....

[WildClarySage]

4. I think the end of the special prosecutor law

was icing for them. Not the main point (unless you love icing) but a real nice side benefit.

The point of persecuting Bill was to ruin him, taint his legacy, consolidate republican power, threaten democrats by show of force, and paint all liberals with the same brush.

[iconoclastNYC]

5. Exactly!!!

Please the Republican lay out thier agenda years in advance, and they do lots of analysis to figure out what the total effect would be.

Knowing that it could kill the special proc. law was defin factored into thier decision to go with the Arkansas Project!

[electropop]

6. I have occasionally wondered that myself.

Pretty good scheme: install a Special Persecutor who is completely insane and unscrupulous, to demonstrate how silly the whole thing is. Get rid of the enabling law. Then start stealing elections and everything else that isn't nailed down, and there's nobody to stop you.

[Laurab]

7. I'm pretty sure

that Clinton had a chance to eliminate the law - it was due to expire, and he renewed it - to his later chagrin. I forget when it was enacted, possibly sometime during the watergate years. I don't believe it was a strategy to eliminate the law though. I believe it was exactly what it appeared to be - an 8 year attack on a president they didn't like. I'm not sure who was in office when it finally did expire, but I sure wish it was still there.

[anaxarchos]

9. It was also a "new economy"/"old economy" fight...

Clinton was stealing all the old GOP success measures (booming economy, tech growth, declining deficits) without any of the give aways, rollbacks, etc. The "new economy" companies were doing just fine in a competitive international environment... They didn't really need a Lockheed foreign policy at that moment.

Focusing on Clinton was a way to change the issue to "moral values" (originally with bribery charges and later with sex).

Otherwise, what is an Enron or Halliburton to do?