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: Frank who wrote (4869)	2/6/1998 2:50:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Presumption of innocence only applies in court. In the court of public opinion it does not apply. I am not convinced one way or the other, but if any of the testimony imputed to the President's secretary is true, I will have much greater doubts about his veracity than I do now (and I must admit I already think he is honesty impaired.) He is a man, and therefore capable of stupidity. Why are you so convinced he didn't do any of these things he is alleged to have done?

To: Frank who wrote (4869)	2/6/1998 3:00:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Well, Frank, first of all, if you will please note I put ALLLEGED in capital letters in my post, because of course there is a presumption of innocence, although it is getting more and more difficult to believe that absolutely none of this is true after reading all the new stories out today. As far as the White House leaking the information about Betty Currie, an attorney on Nightline last night also raised the possibility. It definitely would not be the first time. There is a strategy which entails getting the bad news which is going to come out anyway disseminated in little bits, rather than all at the same time. I think the president may have been stupid enough to get lots of one-sided sex in the White House, and assume that he could get away with it. Who could have imagined that Linda Tripp had tapes? Newsweek this week is reporting that the president seemed stunned at his deposition when questions about Monica Lewinsky started being asked. He and his attorneys thought they had handled that situation, and waved her affidavit at the judge, who overruled them and allowed the questions to continue. His replies were 'lawyerly' and 'squishy' according to Newsweek, but he definitely said he did not meet alone with her after Christmas, and we know that she was at the White House on December 28. Now can you tell me why the president and Vernon Jordan would have gone to the trouble to get an affidavit from Monica denying everything, and a job at Revlon in New York, if there was nothing at all there?

To: Frank who wrote (4869)	2/6/1998 5:07:00 PM
From: George Coyne	Respond to of 20981

<<You actually think this, yet think the president of the U S of A is stupid enough to get a blow job in the White House? Man some people are really willing to reach! What a joke some thought process' are.>> If you consider this out of the realm of possibility, you obviously have no idea of the effects of power on feelings of invulnerability. G. W.

To: Frank who wrote (4869)	2/6/1998 5:17:00 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Frank, this is what we know with a reasonable amount of certainty.. 1. The President arranged for Vernon Jordan to help Monica Lewinsky find a job. First she was offered a job with the U.N. After John Podesta personally took her to see Bill Richardson to offer her a job. She declined the offer. Then Vernon Jordan arranged a job for her at Revlon. Vernon Jordan also drove her to the deposition in the sexual harassment case. Jordan personally drove her to three different places. 2. She was given some gifts by the President. By most accounts, unusual gifts for the average intern. 3. She went to the White House and had a meeting with the President 3 days before she was to give her deposition in the sexual harassment law suit. 4. She visited the White House 37 times in a 20 month period after she left the White House and was working at the Pentagon. This is more visits than the Secretary of Defense had over the same period of time. We know these visits were not for official business. 5. She was given unusual access to come and go from the White House. Especially since she no longer worked there. 6. There is some 20 hours of tape with a friend where Monica Lewinsky admitted to having an affair, where she was told to lie under oath at the deposition. She expressed fear about that lying. 7. The President has admitted to an affair with Jennifer Flowers yet say's he never lied in the past. This is rediculous. He lied at a key moment during his first election on national T.V. to sixty minutes. 8. A talking points memorandum was given to Linda Tripp by Monica Lewinsky encouraging her to lie under oath. 8. Now the secretary's story.... 9. The President has refused to answer questions regarding his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Now, given the above as being reasonably true at this point, to suggest this is some witch hunt is rediculous. There is fairly strong circumstantial evidence that an obstruction of Justice could have taken place. Of course he's innocent until proven guilty. That's what a special prosecutor and a grand jury are for. Or do you think we should just ignore the potential abuses of power which may have taken place?? Michael