The NYT slways has an agenda. What is it here? Is this a backhanded slap in the face at Cheetolini for not sitting down and letting Mueller try to entrap him into saying something stupid, or saying something that could be, or actually is, a lie?(Something Cheets does constantly out of habit?)

The NYT isn’t just taking us on a trip down Memory Lane. The author of this article broke the Lewinsky story. Is he trying to make Slick out to be some poor, misunderstood creature? Is he trying to rehab Slick’s reputation? Is he trying to tell us Slick did the ‘right thing’ (testifying) in the end.

Or am I just too jaded and cynical that I see conspiracies in everything?

When the President Testified: People in the Room Recall Clinton’s 1998 Interrogation
The date was Aug. 17, 1998. President Bill Clinton testified before a grand jury. Twenty years later, people in the room and those waiting nearby share their memories.

by Peter Baker

May 29, 2018

The president of the United States was accused of criminal wrongdoing and the time had come to be interviewed by prosecutors. It was a showdown like none other in American history — or so it seemed at the time.

As President Trump and Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, negotiate about a possible interview in the Russia investigation, all sides can turn back to the only real precedent: the time that President Bill Clinton was interrogated by prosecutors before a grand jury watching over closed circuit television.

*

Twenty years later, several of the people who were in the room at the time and those waiting and watching elsewhere in the White House and the Capitol shared their memories of that day in separate conversations. Mr. Clinton’s recollections are drawn from his memoir, “My Life,” and Hillary Clinton’s from her memoir, “Living History.”

Interviews have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

*

JAY APPERSON, deputy independent counsel: The president was invited six times to voluntarily appear before the grand jury and six times declined. The delays, of course, caused the investigation to continue while they were publicly attacking us for, what was it, ‘six years and $60 million’? So the president largely was responsible for that delay for lots of reasons, including the declination to appear while publicly attesting that he was cooperating fully. This sounds very familiar, doesn’t it?

*

APPERSON: It was supposed to be a two-way video-audio live feed to the grand jurors to allow the grand jurors to directly ask the president whatever questions they had. The day before I received a call from Cheryl Mills [a deputy White House counsel], who said that W.H.C.A. [the White House Communications Agency] could no longer do the two-way feed. It may well be that that was correct. My own view was that was not correct; it was deliberately designed to prevent questions.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/us/politics/clinton-testimony-gran...

The older I get, the less I believe in coincidence. They may occur upon rare occasion, but this smells like something else to me.

But like I said, I’m old, and very jaded and cynical. I got that way from watching people like the Clintons, Trumps, and Muellers give us the ‘business’ for decades.

Or maybe they just figure it’s worth throwing Slick under the bus just to make some kind of ‘point’ about how dishonest and sleazy Cheetolini is.

Who knows?????

PLEASE NOTE: lost my glasses and on an iPhone. The typos probably run rampant throughout this whole OP. I apologize in advance.)