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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (19299)	8/14/1998 8:45:00 AM
From: IQBAL LATIF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

<<but since the list of body parts doesn't include the mouth, it doesn't count oral sex as sexual relations>> Clinton argument according to press- Playing with ''mouth'' Today's Papers - Slate Briefing - From Slate Magazine(http://www.slate.com) Erecting a DefenseBy Scott Shuger After Today's Papers: Jim Surowiecki's weekend stock market talking points. The NYT leads with a report, sourced to senior White House advisors, that President Clinton has discussed, but not finally committed to, a strategy of acknowledging to the grand jury on Monday that he'd had intimate sexual encounters with Monica Lewinsky. USAT leads with a new poll, taken by the paper together with CNN, indicating that Americans want Clinton to tell the truth to the grand jury, even if it means making just such an admission. The WP lead is that the Clinton administration has for months been secretly dissuading United Nations weapons teams from making surprise inspections in Iraq in order to avoid prompting a new crisis with Baghdad. The NYT calls Clinton's grand jury appearance "the most politically and legally perilous moment of his presidency," and says he has been conducting practice sessions in which his lawyers are questioning him and designing answers that allow him to acknowledge a relationship with Lewinsky without going into graphic detail. Both the Times and the WSJ "Washington Wire" say that some advisors are suggesting Clinton afterwards make a public statement about his testimony. According to the Times, the theory under which Clinton may now admit to sexual contact with Lewinsky is this: when he said in his Jones case deposition that he had never had sexual relations with Lewinsky, he was following the definition of sexual relations approved by the Jones trial judge--contact with any of a list of body parts (the paper quotes one Clinton advisor's assessment of the definition: "cockamamie")--but since the list of body parts doesn't include the mouth, it doesn't count oral sex as sexual relations. According to the NYT, the Clinton inner circle realizes the major political drawback of this line: reinforcing the notion of Clinton (in the NYT's choice phrase) as "a lawyerly manipulator of language use to evade responsibility...technically truthful but not fundamentally honest." Another bad reaction will come from women's groups if they ever notice that according to the judge's definition, Clinton is saying that he didn't have sex with Monica, but she had sex with him. Today's Papers - Slate Briefing - From Slate Magazine(http://www.slate.com) Erecting a DefenseBy Scott Shuger After Today's Papers: Jim Surowiecki's weekend stock market talking points. The NYT leads with a report, sourced to senior White House advisors, that President Clinton has discussed, but not finally committed to, a strategy of acknowledging to the grand jury on Monday that he'd had intimate sexual encounters with Monica Lewinsky. USAT leads with a new poll, taken by the paper together with CNN, indicating that Americans want Clinton to tell the truth to the grand jury, even if it means making just such an admission. The WP lead is that the Clinton administration has for months been secretly dissuading United Nations weapons teams from making surprise inspections in Iraq in order to avoid prompting a new crisis with Baghdad. The NYT calls Clinton's grand jury appearance "the most politically and legally perilous moment of his presidency," and says he has been conducting practice sessions in which his lawyers are questioning him and designing answers that allow him to acknowledge a relationship with Lewinsky without going into graphic detail. Both the Times and the WSJ "Washington Wire" say that some advisors are suggesting Clinton afterwards make a public statement about his testimony. According to the Times, the theory under which Clinton may now admit to sexual contact with Lewinsky is this: when he said in his Jones case deposition that he had never had sexual relations with Lewinsky, he was following the definition of sexual relations approved by the Jones trial judge--contact with any of a list of body parts (the paper quotes one Clinton advisor's assessment of the definition: "cockamamie")--but since the list of body parts doesn't include the mouth, it doesn't count oral sex as sexual relations. According to the NYT, the Clinton inner circle realizes the major political drawback of this line: reinforcing the notion of Clinton (in the NYT's choice phrase) as "a lawyerly manipulator of language use to evade responsibility...technically truthful but not fundamentally honest." Another bad reaction will come from women's groups if they ever notice that according to the judge's definition, Clinton is saying that he didn't have sex with Monica, but she had sex with him. My opinion-- The President has a very strong case-- Starr will not. In context of market volatility - Clinton defense on 'blow job' basis makes a good technical argument although morally zilch but from investors perspectives that puts impeachment way beyond and any way everyone was moved to see the President shedding tears for American fallen to the vendetta of callous terrorists. One who should thro the first stone should be the one who had committed no similar offense.. Leave him alone the best course for US..