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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (8622)	5/17/2006 6:32:04 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

If Paula Jones lied (and you have no evidence that she did, much less proof that she was paid to do so) then Clinton could have counter sued. I don't think that the entire incident was a paid for lie, but I'll assume arguendo, that this was the case. It changes nothing. Clinton still perjured himself, and he was still forced to testify in the case by his own law. But okay, if you want it that way, no double standards. Once Bush gets put under oath (finally) we should all support him being asked about his Houston stripper girlfriend, his cocaine arrest, DUI's he didn't admit and then onto his white collar crime, the insider trading at Harken, payoffs from Enron and going AWOl from the Guard and lying about it. Why ask him about a bunch of fantasies, lies, distortions and unsubstantiated rumors? Other than the DUI they all fall under one of those categories. Also it would be a double standard to ask him about all of those things even if he had done all of them, unless Bush had signed a law making one of those things relevant to some issue that he was being sued about.