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: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 1:13:00 PM
From: Hippieslayer	Respond to of 13994

President of the USA does not have the right to act irresponsible if it becomes a security risk. Why is that otherwise intelligent people like yourself gobble up this stupid excuse? There are responsibilities that go with the office and they need to be adhered to. A person that acts recklessly while in the office is a serious problem. Besides, I thought Clinton made a promise to us back in 92 on 60 minutes that he'd never do what he did to hurt his family again(not inthose exact words--he probably said it in a way that gave him some slither room). How many lies does it take for you to finally realize Clinton is s lisbility to this country than an assest. WOrld leaders think he's a joke. Is no wonder why the foreign minister of Greece called Clinton an out an out liar 3 weeks ago?????/

To: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 1:14:00 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Either you are intentionally dissembling or you are just not very bright. Perjury is a felony. It is reported that Ms. Lewinsky admits to her relationship with the Pres. and that he helped her concoct "cover stories". This is directly contrary to his testimony in the Jones case under oath in a judicial proceeding. Sounds like perjury to me. We are in the court of public opinion here, not a judicial proceeding. Notwithstanding his "right to privacy", he has a duty as a lawyer, as our President and as a citizen to answer truthfully in such proceedings. JLA

To: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 1:30:00 PM
From: Sedohr Nod	Respond to of 13994

Rick, Is it my business if they used tax payer money to shut her up? What did Monica do at the pentagon?.....Would she have received that position off her knees or if she had kept her mouth "shut"?...How long do you think it has been since your President paid his own way on a "date"? It very much our business...

To: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 1:39:00 PM
From: George Coyne	Respond to of 13994

Rick, Try following some logical reasoning. worldnetdaily.com G. W.

To: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 1:58:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

You have a dilemna in your case. Either you are circulating internal memos from a corporation that is not your property or you're circulating falsified information as part of a pump 'n dump. As for the Clinton situation, all one need do is look at the number of personnel who have been prosecuted for the same offense. Aberdeen proving grounds, black general who was canned when his background came in hearing for Joint Chiefs of Staff, female pilot canned for affair. Nice double standard at work: one for white males, one for everyone else. >This is where the problem herein lies. WHO said anything about >perjury? Didn't come from the Republican camp, did it? Of course it >did. Perjury is an open issue with the question of materiality in the Paula Jones case. If he purjures at the grand jury deposition, then that is another case. His testimony will be tested against contrary testimony and evidence. The more important issue is tampering with witnesses and attempts to gather evidence to hide them from investigators. He used his aides, personal secretary, and others at government expense to cover up his mistakes. >Clinton may have had an affair with Monica. If true, that is his >private RIGHT to do so. Irrespective of right or wrong, it IS STILL >AN ACT OF PRIVACY, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with PERJURY >merely because he preferred that his sex life NOT become a public >issue. You people keep leaving out the very pertinent fact that he was doing sex on the job and on job premises. The same situation that led to the dismissal of the above personnel. One standard for the commander-in-chief and another for the troops. >He is part of running a COUNTRY. So what the hell does his sex life >have to do with the price of eggs, people? Are any of you >proposing a double standard here? If you have a NEED to know about >HIS sex life, then we must level the playing field, and make it FAIR >to all. I don't care to know about his sex life. Why doesn't he keep it out of a government office? I expect any employee doing it in the FBI Building or State Department building to get booted. In fact, I know of someone who did get booted from the State Dept. The same standard should be held to bosses as to us workers. >Why don't you hire another Linda Tripp character to videotape ALL of >Bill's affairs, illicit or otherwise. Then we can deliver them to Mr. >Witch Hunt himself, Ken "Starr" for evaluation for further testimony >on whether or not Mr. Clinton perjured himself... What a bunch of >crap! Well, the fault lies with the person who tried to get Linda Tripp to commit a federal crime. Many a criminal has been caught by wiretaps. >I noticed that NONE of you addressed a single issue (other than the >right of privacy, in your twisted manner) that I have addressed in my >"rant". The responses were those of people with "tunnel vision" >thought processes... Never looking to the left or the right. Just >your own brand of perception... Politics is inherently "crooked" by >nature. Having said that, WHY have so many of you chosen to zero in >on such incredibly insignificant subject matter? What about the privacy of a corporation and its internal memos? Or did you fake that information as I suspect.

To: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 2:23:00 PM
From: Wildstar	Respond to of 13994

Rick, This is where the problem herein lies. WHO said anything about perjury? Didn't come from the Republican camp, did it? Of course it did. Clinton may have had an affair with Monica. If true, that is his private RIGHT to do so. Irrespective of right or wrong, it IS STILL AN ACT OF PRIVACY, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with PERJURY merely because he preferred that his sex life NOT become a public issue. He is part of running a COUNTRY. So what the hell does his sex life have to do with the price of eggs, people? Are any of you proposing a double standard here? If you have a NEED to know about HIS sex life, then we must level the playing field, and make it FAIR to all. Therefore, Les Horowitz, and the rest of you, I have another request. Please send to me video and/or audiotapes of most of your sexual escapades, as I'd LIKE to investigate whether or not YOU have lied to ME insofar as WHO it is you are having sex with. If I don't get any responses, I will assume you'd RATHER NOT do this. I can't imagine WHY any of you would feel this way... You do realize that there is(was) a court case here don't you? I mean, it's not just like one day at a press conference about child care or the minimum wage or something, Sam Donaldson shouts, "Mr. President, did you have sex with Monica Lewinsky?" and the president replies "No," and then some right wingers hire Linda Tripp to tape Monica, and so on... There was a court case here. You can make the argument (albeit a weak one) that, even in a sexual harrassment suit, it is improper to ask the defendant about other sexual escapades he has had in the workplace. You can even make the argument that, since the Jones suit was dismissed, there should be no more question of perjury. But don't make it seem as if one day out of the blue someone asked Clinton about his sex life and has been hounding him ever since.

To: Rick Jason who wrote (944)	8/11/1998 5:29:00 PM
From: pezz	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 13994

Glad to see you fight the good fight my friend.Most of the people on this thread don't want to admit it but the issue over Monica-gate is because they can't get anything of substance on Clinton.When Star's report comes out with only Monica on it this will fade away. Not because the Republican congress realizes that Clintons' sex life is his business not theirs',but because they do not have the guts to buck the will of the American people.You see, believe it or not Republicans' can read polls just like you and I pez