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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Earl Risch who wrote (1257)	8/30/1998 3:39:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 67261

ER, You know, this is what you guys dont seem to understand about my stand along with Pezz (if I may speak for him). We have never said that Clinton should get away with reckless lawlessness. If he broke the law and corruption can be proven within his organization then we dont want a president like that. But heres the problem: What it looks like, to us on the outside, (and none of the Clinton backers are lawyers here so we are lacking a little compared to the Clinton-haters) is that Starr tried to prove corruption in the Clinton administration and COULD NOT. It may have been there, but Starr couldnt prove it. At that point, Starr decided to go after Clinton on something he could prove - sexual misconduct. Its like a hidden agenda with Starr. Well any hidden motivation in legal matters is distasteful (shades of OJ racism charge etc) but when it involves personal sexual matters and ends up humiliating and destroying the lives of the people involved its just plain disgusting. Thats what we think. Again, we are not condoning "looking the other way" if TRUE CORRUPTION exists in the Clinton camp. Michelle

To: Earl Risch who wrote (1257)	8/30/1998 7:34:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

IMO if they have to nail him on the sex issue, it will be just like getting Al Capone for income tax evasion. ER I totally disagree. Tax evasion is a way of proving that someone received a large sum of money from some (implied illegal) source, right? So in essence its like going after the result of the activity vs. the activity itself, since both are illegal. Otoh there is no cause and effect for financial corruption and sexual misconduct as far as Im concerned, none at all. Michelle BTW that is an interesting parallel between mathematics and philosophy since in mathematical terms tax evasion and the corruption that caused it are equal except for the introduction of a scalar multiple. yeah, ok time to read Gravitys Rainbow again.

To: Earl Risch who wrote (1257)	8/30/1998 9:12:00 PM
From: pezz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

<<IMO if they have to nail him on the sex issue,it will be just like getting Al Capone for income tax evasion>> Earl, can't you see what a bad precedence this would set?Tax evasion is against the law .Consenting sex isn't.If the government can get someone because <<indications are>> what the hell do we need trials ,courts and the like.If "indications are" are not enough to convict the accused goes free,according to our system. Perhaps next time "indications are" might be against you or I.Is scary no? pez