This is an opinion commentary designed to elicit a conversation on ethics and definition of terms. The purpose of this post is to have a meaningful discussion between classmates.  All of you are to be professional and ethical in your comments. There shall be no shaming, rude or inappropriate comments and no foul language. If you whole heartedly disagree with a comment and cannot resist posting please limit your response to I disagree. If you attempt to bully, harass or intimate anyone in the class I will remove you from all future discussions which will impact your grade in the class and I will refer you to the Dean of our Department. 

Please post your comment by Tuesday (20 Points). Then provide a meaningful comment to 2 other students by Thursday as to whether or not you had considered the basis of their comment and if it changes or supports your position (10 points). 

In the late 1990s, President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for what amounted to claims of unethical conduct, which many people believed to be illegal conduct. He had engaged in an extramarital relationship. During depositions in a lawsuit, he made statements under oath implying that the relationship had not occurred. He was faced with a moral dilemma of either admitting his conduct publicly and to his family or attempting to cover it up with what many considered to be ambiguous but essentially false answers. Ultimately, Clinton made certain admissions about the relationship. The issue before Congress and other disciplinary bodies, such as various bar associations of which he was a member, was not the president's personal conduct, but whether he had lied under oath. Although by today's standards this may not seem sufficient to warrant repercussions of such magnitude, the oath to be truthful in matters before the courts is a cornerstone of the U.S. legal system, and the president as much as anyone is obliged to honor this treasured precept.

1. When President Clinton was questioned he was deposed by licensed attorneys. Can a President avoid lying by altering the definition of the conduct he is questioned about or is that the fault of the attorney who posed the questions? 

2. What if anything should the attorney have done that was deposing President Clinton about his "affair"? Should the attorney have been better prepared or followed up better with more definite questions? What else could the attorney have done if anything?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Answer 1 i A President should uphold the commitment to truthfulness espe... View the full answer