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: Jamessmith who wrote (6700)	2/14/1998 3:24:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

James, I think one thing that you, and a lot of other people, may be missing about Linda Tripp is that according to reputable news reports of the contents of the tapes she made, Monica was trying to convince Tripp to lie under oath by promising her, among other things, reassurance that her job was secure if she did so, and a half interest in a condominium Monica owned in Australia. I have enough problems without becoming a defender of Linda Tripp, but certainly someone who was feeling pressured to do something illegal to protect someone she did not particularly like (Clinton), may have felt very compromised, and acted accordingly.

To: Jamessmith who wrote (6700)	2/14/1998 7:21:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Respond to of 20981

James, re Tripp briefing the Jones team, what of it? I see nothing wrong with that. What you and some seem to be getting at is that it is wrong to attempt to get Clinton to tell the truth to the Paula Jones team. Keep in mind that "sting" operations are nothing new, and completely legal. They are distasteful in some ways, in that sometimes they offer a temptation to someone who ordinarily may have been able to avoid that temptation, but nevertheless, the law recognises very few "excuses" for breaking the law. If there are circumstances for which to be lenient with a lawbreaker, then the judge and jury deal with that. I would suggest forgetting about Tripp and whatever motives she may have. Whatever biases Tripp may have in your eyes, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is did Clinton lie the Jones' legal team? That's the question. If Tripp has done illegal things, then she will be prosecuted also, along with anyone else who may have done wrong. But two wrongs don't make a right. They never have, and never will. "Just let Starr do his job, then we can make our judgement. Is it fair?" By all means that is fair, and quite frankly I wonder why the Clinton's legal team seems bent on doing anything but that. DK