Timehost: TIME Editor John Stacks has just arrived. President Clinton
is wrapping up his State of the Union speech. TIME is pleased to bring its State of the Union conference
to Yahoo! tonight. TIME Executive Editor John Stacks is a native of Lancaster,
Pennsylvania. His father was a newspaper editor. John has been a TIME
correspondent and editor since 1967. He has covered Presidential campaigns, and led the TIME
Washington Bureau's coverage of Watergate in 1973 and 1974. In 1978, Stacks co-authored Judge John Sirica's
best-selling book, "To Set The Record Straight". John, what do you think of the President's speech tonight?
John Stacks: It's a superb performance so far.
Ladyhawke asks: Do you think the wonderful state of the nation could
cancel out the President's current personal problems?
John Stacks: I think it's clear from the public opinion polls and from
the response in the Congress to his speech that the successful economy and what by most standards
what would have to be judged as a successful presidency means that any move
to remove him from office will be extremely difficult.
Kappaalphaunt asks: Do you think that Clinton will use the Iraq
situation to draw attention away from his personal scandal?
John Stacks: No. I think that first of all there is widespread
national support for containing Saddam. And secondly it's already clear that the Republican
leaders are willing to support military action against Saddam.
CEM43 asks: John - Can Clinton Survive if Monica testifies to their
affair ?
Timehost: Well, it depends on the evidence that is produced, doesn't
it?
John Stacks: I think that's a difficult question. It's difficult to
predict the outcome. I think most assume that Clinton misbehaved and I think
the question of the final damage to him will depend on the details that
emerge about that misbehavior, and about the efforts to cover it up.
Schooler99 asks: Is the Prez approval going down?
Timehost: Sharply.
Marc_elliott asks: Do you think even a good speech like tonight will
give the president any protection beyond this week? Won't we be back to
Intern-gate by the weekend?
John Stacks: His job rating remains very high despite this, but trust
in his moral rectitude has declined sharply. I think we'll be back to even sooner than the weekend.
Mistress_of_Silence asks: If these allegations are true, it would
seem likely that the President has problems with compulsive sexual
behavior. Would it help his standing in the polls for him to own up to a
problem and seek help?
John Stacks: I think not. The man's 50 years old, the father of an
18-year-old daughter. Whether he calls it a problem or whether it's just
unbelievably bad judgment the problem would remain.
Kappaalphaunt asks: Is Hillary as supportive of the President as she
seems publicly?
John Stacks: We don't know. But she is certainly convincing in her public actions
supporting the President.
F_16Falcon asks: Is there any chance of impeachment?
John Stacks: I would say almost no chance of impeachment.
Based on the idea that to prove perjury and suborning of perjury based on
people's recollections of conversations is very difficult. And impeachment
would have to depend on the proven commission of a crime.
Jcutbirth asks: Does Clinton's behavior affect his power with other
foreign government leaders
John Stacks: I think it's too early to say. If his support at home begins to evaporate the answer
would be yes. done
BigDog_45 asks: Do you see a military strike on Iraq any time soon
John Stacks: I think military action within the next 2 weeks is highly
likely unless Saddam backs down.
Stamm4 asks: Is TIME going to take Hillary's challenge and
investigate whether there is a right-wing conspiracy to "get" Clinton?
John Stacks: I think the magazine and other news organizations have
reported extensively on the anti-Bill Clinton industry.
Timehost: Isn't the point now to find out if there is anything to the
allegations against the President? Regardless of who might be behind the
allegations, it is the evidence or lack of it that counts now.
John Stacks: I agree.
GWALDRUM asks: Don't you think that the President is almost forced to
address the Lewinsky issue in order to try and salvage what credibility he
has left?
John Stacks: Absolutely. He has clearly decided to wait to try to see
if he can find out exactly what she tells the special prosecutor and what
other evidence the special prosecutor uncovers before he goes further in his
explanations.
Timehost: John, if there is physical evidence that there was a sexual
relationship between President Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky isn't that evidence
of perjury? If indeed he denied a relationship under oath?
John Stacks: It's evidence of perjury for Monica Lewinsky's
Timehost: Good point.
John Stacks: affidavit in the Paula Jones case. We don't actually know
with any certainty what Clinton said in his deposition in the Jones case
about Lewinsky (we're sure he denied it but in exactly what language we
don't know). But he can't be guilty of perjury for his denials on
TV.
GWALDRUM asks: Do you see Al Gore distancing himself from Clinton in
order to indirectly not support Clinton's actions to possibly set himself up
for a Presidential bid?
John Stacks: Not at all.
Stamm4 asks: Will Time be revisiting the issue of Social Security,
like the special cover it did a while back, to analyze the president's
proposals?
John Stacks: I think that's safe to say "yes."
Lunarbear asks: why will clinton not mention the scandal in his
address?
John Stacks: It's neither the right place nor the right time. This was
a chance for Clinton to try to emphasize the strengths of his presidency and
his leadership and not really the appropriate place to remind people of his
other problems.
Jennykins_63 asks: sexual improprieties aside, how serious do the
possible obstruction of justice and/or perjury charges appear to be for the
pres and for vern jordan?
Timehost: Again, it depends entirely on the evidence, if there is
credible evidence, doesn't it John?
John Stacks: It's a very good question which really can't be answered
until we see more evidence in the case.
Vball74 asks: If any manager in this country has sexual relations
with an employee, they are fired immediately. Why not the Prez?
Timehost: That's not really true, for starters.
John Stacks: The key question is "Who fires the president?" And the
answer is the Congress of the United States which will respond to public
opinion.
Fred_putty asks: Given Ken Starr's long history of Republican
activism, is he credible one way or another?
John Stacks: I think that will depend totally on the evidence that is
produced on this matter. He has a relatively short time to justify this
extension of his investigation and demonstrate either that he has a case to
go forward or to drop this matter and his entire investigation completely.
Timehost: If he doesn't nail this one, his long journey into sexual
improprieties will sink Starr's credibility for once and for all.
John Stacks: I agree. done
Koolguy15 asks: Do you think that his Daughter will be affected
greatly?
Timehost: I think it's terrible, myself.
John Stacks: From what little we know about her reaction she seems to
be as battle hardened as her parents.
Timehost: She is strong, and intelligent and loved. But this has to
be very tough.
Chukka1 asks: Why isn't our Chief of Staff subject to the same rules
as the other members of the armed services?
Timehost: He is not a member of the Armed Services. He is their
Commander in Chief.
John Stacks: Because he is not a member of the military.
Beachdude67 asks: Given the susceptibility to sensationalism on this
issue, is this really something that we, the people of these United States,
should concern ourselves with?
Timehost: What matters are the accusations of perjury, suborning of
perjury and obstruction of justice.
John Stacks: I think an issue that could determine whether the
president can continue his term is worth some public attention.
Bugman37 asks: The President proposed a lot of new programs tonight,
but he didn't say how he was going to pay for these. Given that, what do you
think that the congress will do with the proposed surplus?
Timehost: Hire another independent counsel?
John Stacks: I believe that the proposals are basically assuming a
budget that comes into balance in the coming fiscal year. so the question of
funding will mostly be a question of choices. That is, what he will cut in
order to pay for new programs?
Koolguy15 asks: can the statement that Clinton had no "sexual
relations" mean something other than what it sounds like?
John Stacks: Not to me it doesn't.
Levesue asks: Do you feel this current scandal has the same impact as
Watergate did?
Timehost: Not anywhere close. So far.
John Stacks: Watergate was quite different in that it involved the
attempt to misuse the power of the federal government to cover up a criminal
act. In some ways, Watergate was about the lust for power, whereas these
allegations involve only lust.
Sarahpeace asks: If Clinton is proven innocent, what will become of
Monica Lewinsky?
John Stacks: She'll probably write a book.
Timehost: She'll get a talk show.
Kokorop asks: If you had the opportunity to interview President
Clinton right now, what would you ask him and how would you present it?
John Stacks: I would attempt to explore the question of whether he is
willing to admit to any relationship, knowledge of or even having met Monica
Lewinsky. The point of which would be to see whether he simply wants to deny
everything or whether, thinking Monica's story has some credibility, would
want to put his own characterization on that relationship.
Kappaalphaunt asks: Do young Republican stars such as George Bush Jr.
have a greater chance of reclaiming the nation's top office now that trust
in the Democratic party is at a low point
Timehost: I'm not sure it is. This is personal.
John Stacks: I'm not sure that trust in the Democratic party declines
in lock-step with distrust of Clinton. It will depend on who the Democrats
nominate in 2000.
Braveheart1000 asks: do you not think that the American media has
blown a trivial matter out of all proportion just to sell papers, magazines,
add space, etc?
Timehost: Nope.
John Stacks: No.
MaxAttackU asks: Do you think Clinton has misused the power of his
office?
John Stacks: If these allegations are true he has abused the trust
placed in him by his supporters, but there is no evidence yet that he has
abused the power of his office.
Raw196 asks: why do the members of current women's rights factions
avoid the issues of sexual harassment when it involves the President?
John Stacks: Because the President has been a big supporter of their
agenda.
Timehost: It's a difficult challenge for them... He's been such a
strong supporter, and Hillary is even a stronger supporter.
MickeyDripin asks: Could Vernon Jordan become a sacrificial lamb?
Could Clinton do that to a friend?
John Stacks: If Jordan did something wrong I think his fate will be in
his own hands, not Clinton's.
Dogman11111 asks: Why did President Clinton come out and make such a
bold statement yesterday, claiming he had no sexual relations with Lewinsky
and phrasing it that way?? it makes him sound guilty
John Stacks: The first possibility is that that is either true or he
believes it's true. The second possibility is that he had no choice because
without a firm denial the presumption of guilt was growing.
GWALDRUM asks: As a political thinker, I am wondering if
professionally, Hillary should have distanced herself in case the
allegations are true? Or, is she right in not playing the victim wife and
being the supporting wife?
Timehost: Hillary has never been a victim. She is a fighter. And she
is admired for that.
John Stacks: That's certainly true. I think Hillary's main cause is Bill--
since the beginning of their marriage through good times and very bad times,
through similar allegations about her husband. With the stakes now
higher than ever, it would be surprising if she did anything but stand
behind him done
Coyote_38 asks: What do you believe qualifies as credible enough
evidence of a Clinton affair with Lewinsky to prosecute Clinton on perjury?
Timehost: I don't think we want to speculate. But feel free if you
want to, John.
John Stacks: It's hard to say what would be totally convincing evidence
but certainly more than the taped allegations from one party in the alleged
relationship.
FourCheeks asks: Would President Kennedy have been subjected to the
same kind of publicity, or is the time just right now in the U.S?
Timehost: The times were different then. People didn't talk as freely
about these things. And they didn't want to know these things about their
President.
John Stacks: And certainly the press talked about them not at all. When Lyndon Johnson
became President, one reporter in the
Washington bureau of the New York Times heard allegations of improprieties by
the new president. His boss, the bureau chief, called him off the story and
said, "I will not have this bureau muckraking the President."
Jthe_hacker asks: This is so cool!, you are actually with time
magazine?
John Stacks: Yes, we are...thanks...
Timehost: Yes, our guest tonight is John Stacks, Executive Editor of
TIME.
John Stacks: And I'm chatting with Janice Castro, the president, CEO and
chairman of Time Online
Path806x asks: Could the President and Mrs. Clinton not necessarily
agree with the traditional view of marriage and simply be bringing their
paradigm forward?
Timehost: Not in this way, not on purpose.
John Stacks: Well, it would appear that they have a different bargain
than most couples I know.
Boogeretr asks: Mr. Stacks, I suggest Time help search for a future
president that the American people can trust , and respect their word.
John Stacks: Well, assuming that Bill Clinton doesn't finish his term,
the Constitution provides for his successor, in Albert Gore. And if Gore were
to succeed Clinton, we would certainly examine his choice of VP in great
detail.
Quietlymakingnoise asks: Do you believe that Al Gore is staying out
of the limelight because he does not want his image tarnished by the
President
Timehost: I think he is honoring his position as Vice President.
John Stacks: No. There's really no proper or comfortable role for Gore until the President articulates
his own defense.
Timehost: I agree.
Nero_1998 asks: What about the latest allegations of Monica forging
papers for a friend to her college? If true, this would make anything she
has said really suspect, wouldn't it?
Timehost: Who knows?
John Stacks: If it's true, it doesn't help her credibility.
Texas_Tech_CS asks: From what you know, what do you think of
Newsweek's decision not to break the scandal story last week?
John Stacks: I think when editors are not utterly confident of the
material their reporters bring them, it's always better to hold back than to
rush ahead.
Levesue asks: Do you think more women will come out with damaging
allegations now that there is a hotbed audience for it?
John Stacks: I have no idea done
Timehost: Good answer.
Mary_colleen asks: What is the perception from Europe regarding this
allegation? Are we being maligned as the Puritanical Americans, or is the
prevailing thought that Clinton has gone too far?
John Stacks: I don't really know.
Timehost: The Europeans always think we're being prudish when we have
a sex scandal, especially the French.
John Stacks: My impression is that public opinion is really not settled
one way or another on this issue, either in Europe or the US.
Timehost: I think Europe would be worried about our resolve if the President is too seriously distracted..
Buddie123 asks: What about Tripp? She seems to have a dubious
history. Do you think she did this on her own or someone else's
John Stacks: Good question. We don't know yet.
Structure17 asks: Do you feel there is a limit to how far the press
should go into covering this story?
John Stacks: The limit should be the truth.
Timehost: I agree.
John Stacks: I think we're in some danger of broadcasting and writing
the same information over and over again when no new facts have actually
come out.
Timehost: You can see that when reporters are interviewing reporters
about what it's like to cover this story on live TV.
John Stacks: The press needs to be a little more patient and not get
ahead of the story.
Timehost: yes. It's not our job to predict it's our job to inform.
John Stacks: good point.
Chase_ka asks: my wife and I would like to know why the media never
ask the president about tax breaks for hard working Americans like us
without children, all the tax breaks include kids....
Timehost: I think we have reported extensively on tax policy and the
president's thinking about all aspects of it. thanks.
Drksd_1 asks: Do Democrats think Janet Reno is part of the
conspiracy
John Stacks: I'm not sure how many Democrats really think there's any
conspiracy and most Democrats, I would think, think that she's been pretty
even handed in her dealings with special investigations.
Timehost: Our guest tonight is John Stacks, Executive Editor of TIME
Magazine. John is pretty busy tonight covering the State of the Union
address and the scandal that has enveloped the White House. He can take a
couple more questions. Thanks
Gioconda17 asks: Doesn't it strike you as funny that Vernon Jordan
would try to find Monica Lewinsky a job at Revlon? honestly, I doubt high
white house people would care about lowly interns
Timehost: Vernon Jordan has always helped people find jobs.
John Stacks: This does seem odd to me...
Timehost: But this one does seem odd, yes.
John Stacks: and it will be interesting to hear Jordan's explanation.
RubyTiara asks: Do you think that Clinton projected his usual charm
and confidence? Was he at his best as a communicator?
John Stacks: I thought he looked tired.
Timehost: I thought he was remarkably composed tonight, but very
drawn.
John Stacks: Tired, from the strain of all this. But he is a superb speaker...
Timehost: Yes.
John Stacks: ...and I think he did a good job
Timehost: Any closing comments, John? How high is the water?
John Stacks: I think the odds are still very much in favor of Clinton
finishing the term. Everything depends on the details that remain to be
discovered and disclosed. But it is no small matter, either to impeach a
president or to force him from office. And that's especially true of a
president presiding over a relatively prosperous and content country.
Timehost: And that's a good place to end. Our guest tonight has been
John Stacks, executive editor of TIME. Thanks very much for joining us here
tonight. And thank you for your good questions, guests.
John Stacks: Thanks, it was a pleasure to be here.
Timehost: Thank you. Come back tomorrow night at 8pm eastern to talk
to former independent counsel Lawrence Walsh, who investigated Iran-Contra and
has many thoughts about the nature of Ken Starr's rambling investigation.
Thank you. See you here tomorrow night.
