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: Sidney Reilly who wrote (4050)	2/1/1998 11:52:00 AM
From: M. M. Jones	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20981

Bob, I apologize for busting in without having read any of the preceding posts, but I'd like to throw out my theory anyway. (Sorry if I'm repeating someone else.) It's getting obvious that Monica Lewinsky was having an affair with one of Clinton's high up staff, and not Clinton. When she talked with Tripp and referred only to the "Big He" and the "Creep", Tripp lept to the conclusion it was Clinton. Monica didn't correct her. The dress (if there was one) was given to Monica by Clinton's staff member. The steamy telephone calls Linda Tripp heard one side of were from the staff member, not from Clinton. Clinton did call her once or twice and did give her small gifts, but he did not give her a dress and did not have an affair with her. This has been nagging at me for the last 36 hours, and I am begining to see it in newspaper reports. This explains Clintons statements, Hillary's statements, and Ginsbergs statements -- plus Chelsea's beaming face, which I saw in the newspaper yesterday. What a joke! We'll see. Regards, M.M.

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (4050)	2/1/1998 1:09:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Respond to of 20981

I think he just wants to keep the wayward vixon out of jail. Well of course as her lawyer that's his job. And it may finally have occurred to him that the easiest way to accomplish it was simply to advise her to stand by the affidavit she signed. His remarks suggest that he's pretty sure Starr has nothing that would constitute proof of perjury on her part. And in that case neither would he have anything on Clinton. After all, if he didn't lie under oath he can arrange for all the job interviews in the world. It isn't a crime. So unless something really astonishing turns up I think the fuss will die down. Probably by now Starr wishes he'd never heard of Monica Lewinsky.