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

To: tejek who wrote (257748)	11/1/2005 11:26:17 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573782

Ted, For years, I have said lying about a BJ is nothing. Then why did Clinton do it? Will you finally admit that Clinton is guilty of just being plain stupid? Tenchusatsu

To: tejek who wrote (257748)	11/1/2005 11:42:18 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573782

For years, I have said lying about a BJ is nothing. You have come back and said that Clinton lied to a grand jury. Now ole Scooter lies to a grand jury.....forget the reason......and you say its nothing??? You're a partisan hypocrite. The truth is disclosing Phlame's name was not the worst crime in the world but lying about that disclosure is a lot worse than lying about a BJ. The guy is getting prosecuted. We'll see what the outcome is. But Clinton's lies were more serious in that they were in an effort to deny justice to individuals in a civil trial. There is no indication that Libby's lies, if they occurred, in any way influenced "justice", either on a criminal or civil issue. So it is difficult to argue that Libby's alleged lies were as serious as Clinton's. That said, if the guy committed perjury, they ought to prosecute him. Whether he is determined to have actually done so is a different matter, however.