Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PiMac who wrote (13225)	7/13/1999 9:01:00 AM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13994

PiMac, First, I am not an attorney, but it is my understanding that very often criminal (or civil) convictions are made based on circumstantial evidence. A court of law (or a hearing) is a fact finding endeavor to determine the truth. In most cases, eyewitnesses cannot be found. So, cases must be pieced together based on the discovery process of what is known. In the Clinton/PJ case, it is basically his word against hers. So, given all the facts that are known, who do you believe? I think PJ was closer to the truth than BC. circumstantial evidence (sûr'kem-stàn'shel èv'î-dens) noun Law. Evidence not bearing directly on the fact in dispute but on various attendant circumstances from which the judge or jury might infer the occurrence of the fact in dispute.

To: PiMac who wrote (13225)	7/13/1999 11:32:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Either they are violating the Constitution or they are not. I argued that they are not... ...I purposely, and ironically, used the phrase. Anyway, it always a question of line- crossing.... ...There are always grey areas, or the application of the law would be mechanical and uncontroversial. The question is how broad or narrow is the area requiring fine judgments, and how compelling are the arguments supporting these judgments.... ...The "good policy" comment came before I responded to a valid point made by Achilles, the "incumbent upon" after. I explained the change already... ...Actually, all of the charges that have formally been lodged against Clinton have to do with the integrity of the process, which he violated, and without which there is no hope for justice... ...Of course justice and law are not perfectly correlated. There is an irreducible level of uncertainty. Even if it were only 0.01%, it would mean that in 1 out of every ten thousand cases, a mistake is made. Plus, the law is crude, and subject to revision, and overburdened with contingency (is the judge harsh or lenient, for example). The point is to reduce whimsy and guard the integrity of the process insofar as is possible... ...I think that we have reason to believe that Clinton has had a pattern of bad behavior with women, but, once again, those were not the grounds of impeachment....