Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: i-node who wrote (142746)	2/18/2002 11:06:04 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) of 1575775

David Re..Excellent point. But I can't help but believe that if Starr felt there was a prosecutable crime he would have pursued it. <<<<<< Starr couldn't have pursued it without asking the 3 judges who assign the special prosecutors permission to do so. Unfortunately, even though Broadderick was exceptionally credible, it WAS 20 years later.<<<<< Bingo. That is why no one pursued it, not just Starr. My point, though, was that Clinton was NOT merely a womanizer. The evidence is overwhelming, when taken in the aggregate, that he committed crimes against AT LEAST SOME of these women. While I agree with you, you must remember that Ted said I was biased. In addition, unfortunately for you and me; Ted has the upper hand here, as her story doesn't = guilty. It adds credence to Paula's case, and the other stories, but that is all.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next