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 : Mr. President please step down for the good of the country -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mo Chips who wrote (87)	8/19/1998 9:32:00 PM
From: j_b	Respond to of 190

<<Shouldn't the president be afforded the same right?>> If this were actually a private matter, I would agree with you. Unfortunately, Clinton turned it into a public matter, not only by having sex with an employee at the office, and using public money to cover it up, but by using his influence to get her a security clearance she shouldn't have, allowing her to take classified documents from the Pentagon and giving them to her ex-boyfriend in Oregon. By getting involved in this way, and showing such poor judgement, he left himself open for possible blackmail or other forms of coercion. When Kennedy got involved with an East German agent, he reportedly was told by the CIA to back off, which he did, for fear of the same type of compromised security. Also remember, it was Hillary who wrote for the Rodino commission for the Nixon impeachment that lying to the public was grounds for impeachment (the first article of impeachment for Nixon) and Clinton that said that any President that lied to the American public should resign.

To: Mo Chips who wrote (87)	8/20/1998 1:17:00 AM
From: Wildstar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 190

Caught at what? Not fully disclosing the truth to a question that I believe he should have never been asked? I think this point of view is the only thing that is keeping Clinton in office. Let me ask you this question : Is it relevant in a sexual harassment case, to ask the defendant about his previous sexual escapades at work? Or put it another way : Does the fact that you know now that Clinton messed around with Lewinsky add even a shred of credibility to the fact that he may have propositioned Paula Jones?