The stature that comes with occupying
(and even having occupied) public office, whether elected or appointed and
especially if high office, combined with the ability to attract the attention
of the media such that the (former) official’s statements have the credibility
of pronouncements, and thus of being true rather than false statements, is
rarely examined for what the stature and societal “mouth-piece” imply (i.e.,
veracity). A very high former elected representative who has even admitted lying
under oath in a court proceeding back while in office can very easily be assumed
decades later to be making a true statement by the public even though that
statement is practically identical to the statement known (and admitted) to have
been false. Even published photos that are strong evidence that the second
statement is false can be dismissed by a public too liable to being beguiled by
clever political birds of prey. I have in mind here the twin statements of Bill
Clinton, who was the U.S. President for two terms in the 1990s and went on to
associate with Jeffrey Epstein, the infamous head of the child-prostitute sex-ring,
and at least one of his paid girls.
The full essay is at "Behind Political Culture."