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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill who wrote (9859)3/27/2001 12:36:24 PM
From: epicure  Respond to of 82486
 
I am actually not defending Clinton. I am disputing the comparison you made between Bill Clinton and Ted Bundy. I don't know there are other "proven" victims. Are there? I seem to recall Jones' case was thrown out of Federal court. I don't know what you mean by proof, or proven victims- because you think Ted Bundy and Bill Clinton are on an equal footing- so we are clearly not on the same page. Proof to me, means legal proof. Perhaps it merely means a convincing and teary testimony on national TV to you- I don't know. Until there is legal proof it's all a matter of allegation. I can understand why that might make you "done" with me. You had a difficult case to make comparing Bundy and Clinton- don't feel bad that it didn't go so well.



To: Bill who wrote (9859)3/27/2001 12:37:33 PM
From: cosmicforce  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 82486
 
<ignore the majority of his proven victims>

I've been a critic of Clinton. But aren't we in a country where such proof is done in a court of law. You are certainly welcome to say you think he's guilty, but "proven"? Proven by whom?

Clinton is gone. You can rejoice. Get on with your life. Comparing him to Bundy is just plain stupid.