"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article LSesk.685$lf2.108@trnddc07, "Mike"
wrote:

There was no perjury.

He lied under oath. That, by definition, is perjury.

No it's not.

However your definition does demonstrate why you don't posses the knowledge
to argue such points.

Clinton was never convicted or even so much as
indicted for any such crime, or any other crime for that matter.

which does not mean he didn't lie.

It means he's innocent of perjury.

If you're
not familiar with the facts of the situation, you should better educate
yourself before you comment.

indeed.

Glad you agree.