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: Kathleen capps who wrote (4828)	9/11/1998 2:52:00 PM
From: j_b	Respond to of 13994

<< Clinton's rebuttel posted on the net:>> No offense, but how can you rebut something you haven't read? And after everything else that Clinton has done, why would I believe him now? As to the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors - the framers insisted that the wording be vague enough to include political misconduct, which abuse of power would be. As to the perjury - I read the transcripts from the PJ deposition - Clinton absolutely denied having any recollection of being alone with Monica. When pressed further, he said that even if they had been alone, nothing "remarkable" happened. He also read Monica's testimony and said that it was true. If she performed oral sex on him (as is currently thought) and denied it in her testimony, Clinton knew she was lying but testified that she was telling the truth. Is any of this lying actually perjury? I leave that to the lawyers. Obviously people will go over the statement and rebut the issues one-by-one. I only answer to a few here to make a point - we need to wait to see how this will unfold. None of us has the facts, and we won't be able to even guess at the legitimacy of Starr's claims until they are examined, with follow-up testimony, by the full Congress.

To: Kathleen capps who wrote (4828)	9/11/1998 2:55:00 PM
From: P.T.Burnem	Respond to of 13994

Kendall: Rape and Murder are NOT Impeachable Offenses! "Holders of public office are ... not to be impeached for private conduct, however wrongful" PTB

To: Kathleen capps who wrote (4828)	9/11/1998 3:07:00 PM
From: Who, me?	Respond to of 13994

THE 11 IMPEACHMENT GROUNDS LISTED BY STARR REPORT Washington (AP)--The report of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr alleged 11 acts by U.S. President Bill Clinton that 'may constitute grounds for impeachment': -Clinton lied under oath in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky; -Lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Lewinsky; -Lied under oath during the Jones deposition when he stated he couldn't recall being alone with Lewinsky and minimized the number of gifts they had exchanged; -Lied under oath in his civil deposition concerning conversations with Lewinsky about her involvement in the Jones case; -Tried to obstruct justice by 'engaging in a pattern of activity to conceal evidence' regarding his relationship with Lewinsky from the judicial process in the Jones case; -Came to an understanding with Lewinsky that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their relationship and tried to obstruct justice by suggesting that Lewinsky file an affidavit so that 'she would not be deposed, she would not contradict his testimony and he could attempt to avoid questions about Ms. Lewinsky at the deposition'; -Tried to obstruct justice by helping Lewinsky obtain a job in New York at a time when she would have been a witness against him were she to tell the truth. -Lied under oath in describing his conversation with Vernon Jordan about Lewinsky; -Tried to obstruct justice by attempting to influence the testimony of his Oval Office secretary, Betty Currie; -Tried to obstruct justice by refusing to testify for seven months while simultaneously lying to potential grand jury witnesses, knowing they would relay the falsehoods to the grand jury; -Committed acts since Jan. 17, 1998, regarding his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky that were 'inconsistent with the president's constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws.'