SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Doughboy who wrote (4151)9/8/1998 5:13:00 PM
From: DMaA  Respond to of 13994
 
I never said you should confine your posts to Clinton. If you can find examples perjury, obstruction of justice, illegal campaign finances, etc., etc., etc., then by all means bring them up if you wish. Even if you find them, mind you, it in no way excuses the boy's abuses. Trotting out an alleged affair Mr Bush may or may not have had while he was a private citizen is an pathetic attempt is all I'm saying.



To: Doughboy who wrote (4151)9/8/1998 6:07:00 PM
From: jlallen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 13994
 
No. Just confine them to corruption. Let's assume Bush was boffing Fitzgerald. He did not lie about it under oath, conspire to obstruct justice, obstruct justice or suborn perjury. Those offenses constitute corruption. Its not about sex. JLA



To: Doughboy who wrote (4151)9/9/1998 5:41:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen  Respond to of 13994
 
(BTW, I agree with Bill that we are beating a dead horse, but your question deserves a response, since you apparently think I should confine my posts to Clinton.)

Just think, DougHboy: sometime very soon those two will be the same: You'll be able to talk about Clinton *and* be beating a dead horse. -GG-

Needless to say, I look forward to that day.