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 (4262)9/9/1998 4:10:00 PM
From: j_b  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 13994
 
<< Black termed those "preposterous" scenarios for removing a president and argued that impeachment should be confined to offenses that are "extremely serious," "in some way corrupt or subvert the political and governmental process" and are "plainly wrong.">>

Assuming everyone were to agree with that view (no impeachment)- what do you think would be the appropriate action to take regarding the 2 crimes described in your excerpt?



To: Doughboy who wrote (4262)9/9/1998 4:19:00 PM
From: Zoltan!  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 13994
 
>>An interesting excerpt from the Post article about the work of Charles Black, an
impeachment scholar:


Those facts are not near what Clinton has done and are easily distinguishable. Moynihan was correct.



To: Doughboy who wrote (4262)9/9/1998 4:35:00 PM
From: Jim S  Respond to of 13994
 
Once again, thanks. The link you posted wasn't exactly what I was looking for, but sure had some interesting history.

Obviously we disagree on the grounds for impeachment, but I thought the process would be more clear-cut. I find it hard to imagine 100 politicians sitting quietly, like a jury, and listening to evidence. But, if they've done it 16 times, I suppose it must be possible.

I wonder how CSPAN will like their ratings?

jim