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: Surething who wrote (7485)	2/17/1998 9:50:00 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

McCurry doubts there's 'a simple, innocent explanation' McCurry's comments, in an interview with the Chicago Tribune, raised the possibility that the White House may be preparing the public for a different, more nuanced explanation than Clinton's so-far emphatic denials that he had sexual relations with Lewinsky. "Maybe there'll be a simple, innocent explanation" in the Lewinsky matter. "I don't think so, because I think we would have offered that up already," McCurry told the Tribune. "We are not in a position to provide a full and complete account, so the art is to make sure everything we say is truthful and credible," he said. "I think it's going to end up being a very complicated story, as most human relationships are. And I don't think it's going to be entirely easy to explain maybe." McCurry, pressed about his remarks during his daily briefing, said he had erred in speculating about something he didn't know about. But he didn't retract the comments. "I said what I said," McCurry said. "I just shouldn't have said it." McCurry called his comments "hypothetically derivative" and blamed it on a "lapse in my sanity." Asked if he was in the doghouse over his remarks, McCurry said, "Not that they've told me, but I've put myself in my own doghouse for having answered questions that I shouldn't have answered."