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: Sedohr Nod who wrote (8539)	2/26/1998 2:18:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Ms. Willey seems to have received what she wanted, which seems to fit into the pattern. But from whom? That's the question. Or one of 'em. You'd have to be a woman to understand how unlikely it is that she would have appeared in public with her blouse askew and her makeup smeared unless she did it on purpose. The defense side is sharing information, better give me a better example than just talking to the Jones lawyers. My understanding is that this is legitimate if they plan to present a joint defense. Not an option for Starr and Jones's lawyers. And you'll notice that in fact he eventually moved to stop them from "mirroring" his investigation. Once they'd served his ends... As for the "talking points": any lawyer would be mad to write that stuff down, even to give her enough to enable HER to write it down. Has it occurred to you that talkative Monica may have gone to a friend--someone familiar with the law, but not all that familiar with it--and asked for advice? Coulda been someone who had no connection with the White House at all. Seems to me plausible enough. If Jordan's telling the truth when he says that both she and Clinton assured him there was no relationship, then she couldn't talk to him about it, and was, it seems, for the most part getting the cold shoulder from the White House. Did she turn to someone else. Possibly someone recommended by Tripp? Pure speculation, but... Didn't follow the Ollie North business. Spouses don't have to testify against each other, so I don't see why they would have called her. As for his minister, well, only Catholic priests can claim the confidentiality of the confessional, as far as I know, but it's difficult to imagine what silly Ollie would have told him that was compromising. I have some problems generally with special prosecutors. They tend to spend a lotta money finding out rather unspectacular stuff, and then, big deal, finally indict some people who are immediately pardoned. Why bother?