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: Zeev Hed who wrote (5225)	9/12/1998 3:51:00 PM
From: Puppy Dawg	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

Am instance that I dread could be as follow: a terrorist groups calls and say they planted an A-bomb (but they did not) in New York, the President will have to say it is not true, otherwise you will have thousands of people dying on their way out through the ridges. Two months later he'll be called on the carpet for lying to the nation. Of course you can come with hundred of hypothetical as well as historical events when lying is necessary. That's BS Zeev, If a terrorist calls and says there is an A Bomb in New York, I would want to know about it. Don't friggin lie to me. I may be one of the ones that gets out by stepping over people on the bridges. Pup :~)

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (5225)	9/12/1998 6:22:00 PM
From: Scrapps	Respond to of 13994

Zeev, you are going to great length to buy Clinton's lame excuses, glad you don't do the same in your investing. One can not compare a sexual relationship with Monica and a matter of National Security. Besides...he has the responsibility to tell the public about a known impending bomb explosion...just the same as the Weather Service has the responsibility to warn us of an approaching hurricane. Let us not get off course in comparing lies under oath with other forms of lies. When you read the Starr report. And you read the testimony of Monica, Clinton and others, then compare these under oath statements with what Clinton has said in the past and what he says now, you can only come to one conclusion...HE LIED. And he has now gone on the apologize for it. Also it doesn't not matter what he describes or believes to be masturbation...that is well defined within the laws. You may want to ask a vice officer...but we really don't care what his clergy has to say about it. It's the law of the land kinda thing. Zeev, I don't know, or know of, any guy who shares Clinton's confusion in the definition of these sexual goings on.