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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (5693)	9/27/1998 8:29:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) of 67261

I see it differently, as does the Starr report, Michelle, on why the report had to contain graphic specifics on sexual acts. It was because the President chose, with careful aforethought, to deny that he had legally been untruthful under oath. It was this ridiculous insistence that landed the details in the Starr report. And even now, the President's version of the specific graphical details differs greatly from Monica's testimony. So you know that if the Starr report had NOT had those details from Monica, you and every other Clinton sympathizer would be crying that there was no evidence that Clinton was being untruthful. In fact, Clinton himself in his video testimony criticized repeatedly the Jones attorneys for "not asking follow-on questions", for "not asking for more specifics". In fact, Clinton ridiculed the ineptness of the Jones attorneys. So your continual harping on "judgement" and "discretion" is misleading at best, and is a simple attempt to twist the facts into something that fits your political goals.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next