Talk:The Hunting of the President

Can someone who has read the book/seen the movie clarify this?
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)

This seems to confuse two films?
The 2003 documentary, and the 2004 remake/update The Hunting of the President Redux -? ELSchissel (talk) 00:40, 28 July 2021 (UTC)