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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (975)	9/28/2000 7:20:42 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

I believe they didn't review the evidence as the senate had already made up its mind. Nothing was going to change the situation. SAD.

To: KLP who wrote (975)	9/28/2000 8:26:49 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

I was truly appalled to realize that NOT ONE Senator in the ENTIRE Senate (either side) came to view any of the evidence It's called plausible deniability... "I didn't see the evidence, so thus it's still hearsay"... Especially the stuff that dealt with how Clinton raped Juanita Broadderick years ago.... I haven't yet picked up the book..... but it doesn't surprise me that the Senators chickened out... No one wants to be the one to expose the nation to the fact that they elected a rapist to the White House.... The entire impeachment process is designed so that it won't be implemented until there is an absolute smoking gun with regard to wrong-doing on the part of the president..... It is certainly not something that is utilized in the same way it was against Andrew Johnson after the civil war. No, they had caught Clinton in a lie, he had perjured himself and still was unrepentant about lying.. Thus, when they finally arrived at the point of impeachment, it was hoped that he will simply do the honorable thing and resign..... I mean, a Republican president would have been EXPECTED to resign in such a case.. It was what Nixon did under circumstances that were far less serious; in his case .... "obstruction of justice" for covering up the Watergate break-in (WHICH HE DID NOT ORDER, BTW). But since there are few things that are truly honorable about Clinton's character...... Well,..then we have to put it in the hands of the democrats like Joe Lieberman....<sigh> I'll have to pick up that book, though.. Thanks for reminding me..