Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK 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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Earl Risch who wrote (1257)	8/30/1998 3:39:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (4) of 67261

ER, You know, this is what you guys dont seem to understand about my stand along with Pezz (if I may speak for him). We have never said that Clinton should get away with reckless lawlessness. If he broke the law and corruption can be proven within his organization then we dont want a president like that. But heres the problem: What it looks like, to us on the outside, (and none of the Clinton backers are lawyers here so we are lacking a little compared to the Clinton-haters) is that Starr tried to prove corruption in the Clinton administration and COULD NOT. It may have been there, but Starr couldnt prove it. At that point, Starr decided to go after Clinton on something he could prove - sexual misconduct. Its like a hidden agenda with Starr. Well any hidden motivation in legal matters is distasteful (shades of OJ racism charge etc) but when it involves personal sexual matters and ends up humiliating and destroying the lives of the people involved its just plain disgusting. Thats what we think. Again, we are not condoning "looking the other way" if TRUE CORRUPTION exists in the Clinton camp. Michelle

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next