SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: hmaly who wrote (133051)2/17/2001 10:15:01 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1570661
 
"Why would that be odd?"

I am sorry, anyone who equates being arrested with classes taken in elementary school has serious ethical problems. There are no two ways about it.

"The democratic party is directly tied to Al Gores campaign"

Yeah, a real smoking gun. You are stretching this one beyond believe. But if that is your fantasy, so be it.

"You admit that it is you that is confusing the issue,"

Oops, and in your universe a single mistake makes you guilty forever. Unless of course, if you are Smirk. You are so full of it.

"If you want to change the phrase to spending, lets do that"

I didn't change the phrase, that is what Smirk said. You might want to deny reality, you have done an awful lot of it, but that is the way it is. Imagine what you will, you clearly do.

"I thought you were talking about yourself when you posted this in your post."

I am not surprised. Most people like you do. Doesn't change reality, but there it is.

"Is it you contention that only the crooks deserve to defended from outrageous lies?"

I know it is difficult for you to believe, but if Smirk was actually honest you could actually quote something real instead of distorting the truth to defend him. Since you can't...

But hey, if you believe that mis-quoting, weaseling and lying is the best way to go about life, I wish you a good one. I think it is really sad, but you have made your choices. For what it is worth it is hard to define me as a democrat, I vote for people who I think are honest, a concept you probably have trouble with. I didn't vote for Gore (I didn't like his stance on the Elian thing) and I never voted for Bill.

"I didn't realize I had done that to you and I apologize. "

Look, you might find it important to blame others when you make a mistake, a character flaw you share with Smirk, but I don't. I never said my mistake was your fault and I don't need your apology. I think it interesting that you view someone who admits to making a mistake as weak. That points up another rather slimy aspect of your character.



To: hmaly who wrote (133051)2/18/2001 12:52:11 AM
From: Scumbria  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1570661
 
Harry,

As usual, the right wing lead media lynching of Clinton is a pile of crapola.

Here are Clinton's reasons for the pardon, straight from the horse's mouth:

1) I understood that the other oil companies that had structured transactions like those on which Mr. Rich and Mr. Green were indicted were instead sued civilly by the government; (2) I was informed that, in 1985, in a related case against a trading partner of Mr. Rich and Mr. Green, the Energy Department, which was responsible for enforcing the governing law, found that the manner in which the Rich/Green companies had accounted for these transactions was proper; (3) two highly regarded tax experts, Bernard Wolfman of Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center, reviewed the transactions in question and concluded that the companies "were correct in their U.S. income tax treatment of all the items in question, and [that] there was no unreported federal income or additional tax liability attributable to any of the [challenged] transactions"; (4) in order to settle the government's case against them, the two men's companies had paid approximately $200 million in fines, penalties and taxes, most of which might not even have been warranted under the Wolfman/Ginsburg analysis that the companies had followed the law and correctly reported their income; (5) the Justice Department in 1989 rejected the use of racketeering statutes in tax cases like this one, a position that The Wall Street Journal editorial page, among others, agreed with at the time; (6) it was my understanding that Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder's position on the pardon application was "neutral, leaning for"; (7) the case for the pardons was reviewed and advocated not only by my former White House counsel Jack Quinn but also by three distinguished Republican attorneys: Leonard Garment, a former Nixon White House official; William Bradford Reynolds, a former high-ranking official in the Reagan Justice Department; and Lewis Libby, now Vice President Cheney's chief of staff; (8) finally, and importantly, many present and former high-ranking Israeli officials of both major political parties and leaders of Jewish communities in America and Europe urged the pardon of Mr. Rich because of his contributions and services to Israeli charitable causes, to the Mossad's efforts to rescue and evacuate Jews from hostile countries, and to the peace process through sponsorship of education and health programs in Gaza and the West Bank.

nytimes.com

Scumbria



To: hmaly who wrote (133051)2/18/2001 2:27:23 AM
From: Amy J  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1570661
 
RE: "Bush...To be pulled over for DUI or DWI and to forger it seems rather odd. <<<< Why would that be odd? What is there to remind you often enough such that you would keep it in your memory. I will bet you that you can't even remember things from 5 yrs ago much less 25. And if you think you can take a test"
---------

Hmaly,

I am very surprised to read your post, where you said it would be very easy to forget about a DUI.

I couldn't imagine a person ever forgetting something as serious as that.

You likened this serious event to: "tell me every class you took when you were in first grade and the grade you got."

Amy J