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: j_b who wrote (3545)	9/18/1998 2:16:00 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Read Replies (2) of 67261

j_b, On the subject of Henry Hydes Affair, a friend of the husband approached numerous news outlets with the story(which Mr. Snodgrass had told him). Salon magazine was the only one that contacted the friend & Mr. & Mrs. Snodgrass. The wife used her daughter as her spokesperson with the press and admitted the affair & her annoyance with Mr. Hyde for never acknowledging his past. Mr. Snodgrass did take his wife back after he approached Mrs. Hyde with the truth & Henry broke off the affair, but to their 3 childrens great sadness(according to the Snodgrass' daughter) the marriage was unsalvageable and ended in divorce. Last night on Crossfire, Bill Press(the liberal) showed an E-mail he received from Mr. Snodgrass' friend which laid out the facts of the affair. To my mind, it's important that the public knows the background of those who will sit in judgement on Pres. Clinton. The impact of the "distinguished"(now debatable) Chairman of the Judiciary Committee(Mr. Hyde) pontificating on the evils of infidelity & lying would be much stronger from someone who had always lived his own life according to those ideals. Now that we know he is not "Saint Henry," the impact will be somewhat muted (as it should be). Similarly, when Dan Burton used the word "scumbag" while referring to the Pres., the impact was shocking - we assumed his own morals were beyond reproach.......now we know better. Both these men cannot use themselves as examples of "honesty"....they lied(granted, not under oath)in order to protect themselves in the past.......why should we believe they are "chaste" judges of Pres. Clinton's misconduct??.......IMO the truth serves us well in order to determine which action will serve the "greater good" in this ongoing maelstrom. Ann

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next