I would just like to appeal to the common sense of the gentleman from Texas. This amendment, which they all have handwritten at the last minute, says that deliberately from taking steps--for refraining from taking steps to discover whether or not one's own statements are false is reckless, but if the failure to investigate whether one's own statements were false was not deliberate, then that conduct is not considered to be reckless. How in the world could a failure to investigate whether or not one's own statements were false, that it was not deliberate, possibly justify as a way of exonerating one from responsibility? I ask, who has responsibility to make sure that your statement is not false in the first place?
John Hope Bryant: “I would just like to appeal to the common sense of the gentleman from Texas. This amendment, which they all have…”
On the recordMarch 8, 1995
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing an amendment related to accountability for false statements.
Share
More from John Hope Bryant
Dec 18, 1998
Let me respond briefly that the Constitution itself talks about impeachment as well as election. The two processes are compatible, according to our forefathers, since they completely understood that you had first to be elected in order to…
Sep 25, 1996
How does the gentleman distinguish, now? We are talking about a Federal issue here. Ought it not be the same in all States also, that we require they be in school?
Dec 18, 1998
With over 60,000 documents, in the presentation of the White House lawyer, Mr. Ruff, he made no challenge to the testimony of Betty Currie, Monica Lewinsky or anyone else in the factual situation that we have had before us.





