This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Can someone who has read the book/seen the movie clarify this?edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The final paragraph, particularly this statement "She told the independent counsel the Clinton's did nothing wrong, and the independent counsel said they had statements prepared and she simply had to agree with the pre-written claims." leaves a lot of questions unanswered. First off, the statement implies she (Susan McDougal) committed perjury by signing a sworn statement she knew to be false. I have read other accounts how Ken Starr's team was quite aggressive at getting cooperation out of people reluctant to testify. However, again as written, this statement, and indeed the entire paragraph, don't make sense. Can someone who has read the book/seen the movie expand this summary to not leave these unanswered questions? Dave (talk) 04:19, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
