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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: HPilot who wrote (3820)	1/31/1998 11:11:00 AM
From: Hippieslayer	Respond to of 20981

Is it just me, or have you noticed that the picture of people that is found at the top of SI has a picture of a female- I suppose- that sort of reminds me of Linda Tripp. It the one right above the "SPOTLIGHT" link wearing the black hat. I should probably lay of the drugs for awhile.

To: HPilot who wrote (3820)	1/31/1998 11:27:00 AM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Remember the rumor's that he is having trouble finding evidence is just as much a rumor as the dress. True. We don't know what he has. BUT: the dress apparently wasn't "rumor" in the conventional sense. I doubt whether the FBI would have seized it on Goldberg's word alone, and so am inclined to believe that Lewinsky actually was recorded as saying it had a semen stain on it and that she intended to keep it. (Ginsburg denies this, but I wonder whether he's beginning to have serious doubts about his client's veracity.) So Starr doesn't have any physical evidence. And if he'd intended to use Monica to provide direct evidence (which still would have been her word against Clinton's), well, after the dress business she's looking a whole lot less credible. Does can he actually produce a witness who saw them having it off? I doubt it. And without that there is no proof, unless Clinton himself provided her with unequivocally compromising material in the form of messages or letters. That leaves only the story of what the White House, if it's smart, will begin characterizing as "an emotionally disturbed young woman".