Prosecutor Kenneth Starr’s alleged confidence in his witness, Monica Lewinsky, is undercut by his action of requiring her to take a polygraph examination. If he can’t believe her, who can? Since a polygraph is not admissible in any court, and Lewinsky has made statements that contradict each other, what does Starr have? Nothing. And he knows it. So what’s this all about? An extremely partisan Republican, Starr is out to tar the president with whatever slime he can dig out of any sewer in the country. Marshall T. Cary Bangor
After reading the front page of the Bangor Daily News of Jan. 23, concerning how people feel about our president and how they are ready to accept his guilt as fact, I still feel that even Clinton is assumed innocent until proven guilty.
That is now the reason I’m writing to the editor. I feel the timing is all bad. Guilty or not, Clinton doesn’t need any diversion from what is going on in Iraq and the kind of person we have to deal with in Saddam Hussein. He is taking full advantage of the turmoil here, while we are trying to make Clinton look like a fool and stripping him of all the credibility he needs to deal with, first, the United Nations and then Iraq. Saddam is in his glory after seeing this. Guilty or not, we can deal with this problem after the problems with Iraq are worked out. David Hansell Caribou
What’s the difference between Kelly Flinn and President Clinton? President Clinton still has a job. Terry Shortt Orono