Misconception of Clinton's problems

In my estimation, many people are missing the entire meaning of the current fiasco in the U.S.A. regarding President "Zipper Bill" Clinton. Mr. Chew G.H.'s letter of Sunday, Sept. 20, 1998, Having one's cake, and eating it may be a worthy example of this misreckoning.

I wholeheartedly agree with the context of his letter relative to possible multiple loves of people, children, animals, objects, and other such things.

But, the point of Mr. Kenneth Starr's investigation was not to "catch" Bill Clinton in a love affair or other sexual encounter. His intent, as prescribed by the U.S. Justice Department, was to ascertain if Bill Clinton told the truth or lied (committed perjury) when he testified (under oath) in front of a grand jury investigation.

The X-rated outcome of this investigation being published and disseminated world wide via the Internet is merely the necessary proof to show that Bill Clinton did not relate the truth. His possible impeachment will be based "solely" upon the above paragraph's premise. It is not his "physical actions, feelings, or thoughts" that have caused him legal problems, although they were probably morally unacceptable to most people, acknowledging his status in the U.S. and the World. They are not foundations for legal contest. It is his lies that have gotten him into trouble.

He may also resign as president, but may still face charges of perjury in court. Perjury under oath is a very serious offense in America that is punishable under law, and can get you jail time if the charges are validated. Since the president of the U.S.A., (defined by law) cannot be brought up on charges in a common court, the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate may bring impeachment charges against him.

It is only his sworn statements under oath that have brought Bill Clinton to the brink of disaster.

In fact, the people of Indonesia should be made aware of another American axiom, "If the shoe fits, wear it."

ROBERT C. MILLER

Medan, North Sumatra