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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (31060)	1/30/1999 2:06:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) of 67261

I miss the Rehnquist reference, but I'll take on the others. I believe Barr, that he thought he was addressing a legitimate group. Since he has seen fit to characterize them as having "bizarre views" on racial matters, I think he has sufficiently distanced himself. Lott's association is murkier, and he may indeed have more to answer for, but we'll see. If much more comes out, I personally think he should resign his leadership post. You didn't quite leave out the leading House manager, and I have said before that lying for reasons of state about covert operations are judged differently than lying to protect one's butt. I have also noted elsewhere that Clinton was hoisted by his own petard, since he supported and signed the legislation permitting the "fishing expedition" that started the legal mess. It is more than just that he should suffer the consequences. As for making an example: A.)he was under oath; B.) he's President. I don't know why neither of those things means more to you.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next