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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Rainy_Day_Woman who wrote (1382)9/1/1998 11:29:00 AM
From: stan s.  Read Replies (3) of 67261
 
Sherry, you intentionally missed the point.

The frivolity of this case has yet to be determined.

Frivolous suits are filed all the time as diversionary tactics in other arenas.

By all means the Jones case should have proceeded...after Clinton's term was
complete.

Many legal scholars were surprised that it was allowed during an incumbency...
particularly in light of the latent nature of the filing of the suit.

My point was, as you well know, that this kind of suit could start to be filed
as an irritation....backed by political motives.

Remember the "facts" back then were few and far between.....what has
happened since does not justify earlier proceedings. That's not the way it
works.

The thrust of my post was to engage in some philosophical discussion not
a continuation of the partisan crap spewed here, on both sides.

Perhaps the "truth" emerges when opposing views collide, but wouldn't
it be special if someone looked at the issues fairly and in context, without
a need to win.

It obviously ain't gonna happen here.

By the way reread my quote...make the effort to be fair, nowhere
did I imply sexual harassment was frivolous...a cheap shot Sherry.

Use the Jones case as an example...if a standing president can be forced to testify in
such cases...is it not probable that frivolous cases will start to be filed....just in order to
force testimony....with opposition lawyers (having delved into the most private of
matters) questing for answers that can later be shown to be perjury even if on trivial
matters.

See ya,

Stan
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News