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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (859)	8/9/1998 12:54:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

The first few paragraphs should be about me-what I do now, what I did at the White House and for how many years I was there as a career person and as a political appointee. Kathleen and I were friends. At around the time of her husband's death, she came to me after she allegedly came out of the oval and looked ___, I don't recall her exact words, but she claimed at the time ___ and was very happy. I did not see her go in or see her come out. Talk about when I became out of touch with her and maybe why. The next time I heard of her was when a Newsweek reporter showed up in my office saying she was naming me as a someone who would corroborate that she was sexually harassed by the President. I spoke with her that evening, etc. and she relayed to me a sequence of events that was very dissimilar from what I remembered happening. As a result of my conversation with her and subsequent reports that showed she had tried to enlist the help of someone else in her lie that the President sexually harassed her, I now do not believe that what she claimed happened really happened. I now find it completely plausible that she herself smeared her lipstick, untucked her blouse, etc. I never saw her go into the oval office, or come out of the oval office. I have never observed the President behave inappropriately with anybody.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (859)	8/9/1998 1:16:00 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 13994

No matter. He will lie his head off when he is finally boxed in. JLA

To: Zoltan! who wrote (859)	8/9/1998 1:24:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Monica was incapable of composing an intelligible letter, Meaning, in general or specifically related to this incident. Understandable if it is related to the incident, in general I find that statement hard to believe. Michelle

To: Zoltan! who wrote (859)	8/9/1998 2:37:00 PM
From: DD™	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

WHEN TIMES GET TOUGH FOR SLICK: GO INTO CAMPAIGN MODE.. nydailynews.com:80/1998-08-09/News_and_Views/Scandal_Sheet/a-1991.asp DD

To: Zoltan! who wrote (859)	8/9/1998 3:16:00 PM
From: Las Vegas Lou	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Bruce Lindsey's back surgery is a joke. For any of us, I can state with complete certainty that we would be allowed a length of stay in the hospital of one week or less for the most extensive type of back surgery possible, by the utilization review of any insurance company. Since Bruce has insurance paid for by the taxpayers the least he could do is thank us for the R&R. Counselor Lindsey is going to be hospitalized for over 4 weeks. As always the normal rules don't apply to these people. Additionally, modern surgical techniques, anesthesia and rehabilitation and physical therapy are all geared toward recovery from this type of surgery in days or weeks rather than months. If Mr. Lindsey is so debilitated by this then it only seems fair that he be placed on disability. Why not take the grand jury to his hotel...er...hospital room and have him testify there.