SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Did Slick Boink Monica?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (4933)2/6/1998 7:50:00 PM
From: ViperChick Secret Agent 006.9   of 20981
 
Holly


A
secretary is necessarily privy to more sensitive personal information than would even a
person's physician or attorney. The secretary literally is an extension of the employer.

With that in mind, to go after Clinton's personal secretary is contemptible.

I am just shaking my head. No one should be above the law nor beyond its reach.
It is hard for me to understand why an obviously educated and sincere person would think that a secretary should be exempt.

" If Clinton were indeed anxious for Mrs. Currie to give testimony--which I doubt,
and not because of Clinton wrongdoing--that direction should come from Clinton.
Mrs. Currie is in the wrong to have acted unilaterally--subpoened or not. Again, the
truth can be a diaphanous creature. "


So I suppose you would have a secretary be a co-conspirator.

Lisa

Ps If YOU know your boss is committing a crime are you going to keep your mouth shut - period -and morally be comfortable with that...let alone if you are under a legal requirement to talk....
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News