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 : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (19584)	8/21/2002 10:19:05 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 21057

No dipshit, lying under oath in a judicial proceeding, even after the BillyBubba years, is still a big deal in most parts of the country....

To: TigerPaw who wrote (19584)	8/21/2002 10:52:54 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

TP, If you are in a lawsuit, and your opponent lies under oath to the jury or the judge, and as a result of that lie you lose the case (or go to jail due to the false testimony), is that ok with you?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (19584)	8/22/2002 9:15:40 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 21057

People are entitled to expect privacy regarding their sex lives. When that privacy is invaded, they are expected to lie about it. Miss Manners says it's OK to lie when people ask you inappropriate questions. The situation should never have been pushed far enough where those questions were asked under oath. So when they are, you are faced with a choice. It was a choice Clinton should not have been put into a position of having to make. Still, he made the wrong choice. The US justice system may have been turned into a kangaroo court, but it's still the US justice system and you don't lie under oath.