Whether other women may have been subjected to workplace harassment, and whether such evidence has allegedly been suppressed does not change the fact that plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she has a case worthy of submitting to a jury.

Whatever relevance such evidence may have to prove other elements of plaintiff's case, it does not have anything to do with the issues presented by the president's and Ferguson's motions for summary judgment. I.e., whether plaintiff herself was the victim of alleged quid pro quo or a hostile work environment, sexual harassment, whether the president and Ferguson conspired to deprive her of her civil rights, or whether she suffered emotional distress so severe in nature that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but that's nonsense,

Because we have not been informed what the nature and scope of Mr. Starr's testimony will be, it is difficult to predict with any certainty just how long it will take to conduct a full an fair examination. I understand however that Mr. Starr has been allocated two hours for an uninterrupted presentation, ... We submit that anything less than 90 minutes would unfairly constrain our ability to explore the basis for Mr. Starr's testimony and for any conclusions he may proffer.

Our last words to you, which are the words I began with: William Jefferson Clinton is not guilty of the charges that have been brought against him, he did not commit perjury, he did not commit obstruction of justice, he must not be removed from office,

The president of the United States did not tamper with a witness,