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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Farmboy who wrote (489038)	5/29/2012 9:20:10 PM
From: Big Black Swan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793976

True. There's no legal proof (no arrest records and convictions) that either Clinton or Bush ever used weed or got drunk. All we have is the many anecdotal reports from respectable sources and Bush/Clinton's refusals to deny them. So if that's your standard, then we can safely say from a legal perspective both of them are 100% innocent until proven otherwise. But of course Obama is in the same boat in this regard. There's no actual physical evidence against him and he was never arrested or convicted either. So we have to presume he's innocent too by that ultimate standard, just like with Bush and Clinton. Really, the only difference is that one admitted it and the others refused to answer the question.