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: biodoc who wrote (1804)	8/18/1998 5:05:00 PM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

The news I heard just said that he refused to answer, not that he took the fifth amendment. Of course, nobody will really know until Starr releases his report. At this stage we can't really be sure what he said and what Monica said. We do know the type of evasions he took in his speech, and the record in the Jones trial which gives us some strong hints. Starr is expected to release his report within a month.

To: biodoc who wrote (1804)	8/18/1998 5:06:00 PM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

<<It wouldn't be contempt unless he had immunity--he could invoke the 5th amendment and not answer just like any other citizen. >> If he refused to answer based on his 5th ammendment rights, I would agree with you. If he just refused to answer because he felt the questions were no one's business, he would be in contempt (as was seen with Susam McDougal). So far, we don't know what basis was used to refuse to answer (or even if he refused to answer).