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: flickerful who wrote (11486)	3/19/1998 12:08:00 AM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

flickerful, this is really quite baffling to me. We have Willey coming out of the Oval Office all smudged up, and Tripp seeing her, which is corroboration, and also the fact that a major part of the talking points document (whoever wrote it) is about coaching Tripp to change her story and say it was now completely plausible that Willey had disheveled herself. I would be inclined to say that it is impossible to tell whether Willey is telling the truth at this point, except that Mr. Landow is being investigated by the FBI for urging her to change her story. Willey has also stated that attorney Bennett threatened her. Willey's testimony, if true, is really the straw that breaks the camel's back for feminists and others who found something suspicious about the other women who came forward, and I am sure the White House has known that for some time. So I am getting cynical enough that it is plausible to me, at least, that Steele and Landow are working on the same team. But I don't really know!!! Has anyone investigated Steele yet? Thanks for posting the story, flickerful. Christine

To: flickerful who wrote (11486)	3/19/1998 12:19:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20981

Is anyone surprised to learn that David Kendall, Clinton's personal attorney, represents the National Enquirer? Or that there have been efforts by that august journal to report dirt on Starr? Meanwhile, the Enquirer pays out $7,000 to a Julie Steele for a photo of Kathleen Willey -- days after Steele decided to recant the account she gave Newsweek confirming Willey's version of the lascivious treatment she received at the hands of one President Clinton -- and no one questions the credibility of Steele's recanting. Wasn't it Gennifer Flowers who went unbelieved because a tabloid gave her money? spectator.org Now that we know that Steele is into commerce, I wonder about any price tag for changing her story after so many months? The media seems to be neglecting that obvious angle.