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.

Pastimes : MOLEGATE! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (566)	10/1/2000 1:59:48 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1719

>>>So do you have some inside information source that says Yvette isn't a mole planted by the Dems?<<< So do you have some inside information source that says Yvette didn't simply become disgusted by the quality of the Republican campaign? Don't you think a mole would have properly copied and sent the appropriate source with the intended information? If, as you allege, Yvette is a mole, why then did she copy former Congressman Tom Downey, who'd ultimately turn in the materials? One doesn't mail something like secret presidential debate materials without an exact and intended recepient source. And it's extremly extreme obvious Downey was not that source receipient for a mole. The mole argument don't fly. The debate tapes incident, more and more, appears a classic Republican dirty tricks' put-the-other-side-off-balance, trip-up-the-debates, come-from-behind-in-the-polls type set-up promulgated in the hope Gore's group would take the bait. It didn't. If not the above scenario, then possibly it's a case where an individual became upset with the Republicans after realizing what they actually stood for, i.e., learning firsthand both their policy and strategy. Disgruntled, she could have mailed the tapes. How 'bout these interesting questions: What was actually in the debate video and documents? Could there be a blockbuster as to content also? Was the sender sending compulsively due to the urgency of content within the sent materials? All of this is perhaps remote. Yet, worthy of thought. And yet another good question: Are we willing to change the title of this thread should things turn out other than a mole-like thing? (LOL)

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (566)	10/1/2000 10:39:00 PM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 1719

the title of this thread? MOLEgate. This thread should have been named STUPIDgate. You don't understand the juvenile tricks played in Texas politics. Bush didn't understand that he was playing on a national stage and that stupid pol tricks don't play well in that arena. some inside information It doesn't take inside information to realize that Lozano's story doesn't hold water. It doesn't take inside information to learn that McKinnon is backing her 100%. (Pay $10 dollars to express mail pants when the Gap store is closer than the post office, really..) This story speaks right to Bush. These are the type of appointees that he trusts 100%. If it wasn't clear before that he is not only ignorant, but unable to determine who is stupid around him, then this affair is the final proof. TP