We specialize in hard to find items
(1)
A Vast Conspiracy: The Real Story of the Sex Scandal That Nearly Brought Down a President
Share Tweet
*Price and Stocks may change without prior notice
*Packaging of actual item may differ from photo shown
- Electrical items MAY be 110 volts.
- 7 Day Return Policy
- All products are genuine and original
About A Vast Conspiracy: The Real Story Of The Sex
Product Description NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • The inspiration for Impeachment: American Crime Story on FX The definitive account of the Clinton-Lewinsky sex scandals, the extraordinary ordeal that nearly brought down a president—with a new preface by the author that reframes the events in light of the Me Too movement “A story as taut and surprising as any thriller . . . [an] unimpeachable page-turner.”—People First published a year after the infamous impeachment trial, this propulsive narrative captures the full arc of the Clinton sex scandals—from their beginnings in a Little Rock hotel to their culmination on the floor of the United States Senate with only the second vote on presidential removal in American history. Rich in character and fueled with the high octane of a sensational legal thriller, A Vast Conspiracy has indelibly shaped our understanding of this disastrous moment in American political history. Review “A superb work of factual and legal analysis . . . Few novels are as gripping.” —The New York Review of Books “A good read . . . a brave book.” —Economist “A story as taut and surprising as any thriller . . . Unimpeachable page-turner.” —People About the Author Jeffrey Toobin is the bestselling author of True Crimes and Misdemeanors, The Oath, The Nine, Too Close to Call, The Run of His Life, which was made into the critically acclaimed FX series American Crime Story: The People v. O.J. Simpson, and A Vast Conspiracy, the inspiration for Impeachment: American Crime Story. He is the chief legal analyst at CNN. Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved. For all the condemnation of Clinton's speech in the news media, the prosecution team didn't take any false optimism out of the events of August 17. In his grand jury testimony, the president had been more careful than in his deposition, seven months earlier. Increasingly, the savvier members of the prosecution staff recognized that their entire case came down to the sex-whether the president had lied about it in his deposition and then in his grand jury testimony. In light of Clinton's refusal to answer certain questions, Bittman and Wisenberg had pinned him down as best they could. Before the grand jury, Clinton had repeated his position that as he understood the definition of sexual relations provided to him on January 18, he had not had such contacts with Lewinsky. Clinton had admitted to "inappropriate intimate contact," which he declined to spell out, but by a sort of process of elimination, he had said he had not "directly" touched Lewinsky's breasts or vagina with his hands or mouth "with intent to arouse" her. It was a slender basis on which to make a case. Since Clinton had admitted intimate contact, what difference did it make whether he acknowledged precisely how and where he had placed his hands and mouth? A big difference, according to the clear consensus at the Office of Independent Counsel. If they could prove a falsehood-any falsehood-they were going to make a case, regardless of the subject matter. In a United States Attorney's Office, where judges and prosecutors were lied to with regularity, prosecutors would weigh the significance of the false statements and consider whether the government's resources might be better deployed in another way. But in an independent counsel's office, especially this one, this kind of thinking was anathema. As Starr said in one of his curbside news conferences, "Okay, you're taking an oath . . . under God, that you will-'so help me, God, that I will tell the truth.' That's awfully important. Now that means we attach a special importance to it. There's no room for white lies. There's no room for shading. There's only room for truth. . . . You cannot defile the temple of justice." So Starr would pursue the perjury about sex, and that raised a different issue. In her testimony before the grand jury on August 6, Lewinsky had spoken in a general way about her sexual relationship
