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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dougjn who wrote (14925)	9/12/1998 11:31:00 PM
From: Thomas Sprague	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

dougjn, If President Clinton was CEO of QCOM would you be so trusting with your money??????????????? TDS

To: dougjn who wrote (14925)	9/12/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

To Doug: Rant read. Fine recital of history and some good reminders re what the founding fathers may or may not have meant. Problem is, no one is now alive to know what the founding fathers really meant and the Congress is now to decide what that may be with the finding by the House and the trial in the Senate with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding. That decision is final. Period. I am reminded of the poem - a rose is a rose is a rose, viz perjury is perjury is perjury. Fine lines and fine distinctions may be fun for lawyers but are completely irrelevant to the Congressional impeachment proceedings. Maybe that is a bad idea, and maybe some of us wish that we not so, but it is. The President will be impeached if the House does that, and if the Senate finds him guilty - that is all she wrote. But probably Clinton will fight on after that too - if it should come to that. :-) Perhaps he would appeal to the Supreme Court - he will if past is prologue. After all that would keep a roof over his head for a little time longer. :-) Chaz

To: dougjn who wrote (14925)	9/12/1998 11:58:00 PM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Doug, Funny that while I agree with you that these crimes, to the extent that they exist, do not constitute High Crimes and MisD's, and that Starr and his investigations are a disgrace, and that the country has a lesson to learn from this episode,and in addition that we and the rest of the world should not be put through the drawn out spectacle of an impeachment over such tawdry small time matters, I think the right thing for Mr Bill do to would be to resign. He knew traps were laid for him and with stupendous recklessness stepped into one. Compounding his mistake, he then proceeded to lie under oath and in a very direct way in front of the American people, setting in motion a process which is harmful to our national interest, which is in fact something very serious.It's true that the media and public obsession for the story speaks badly for all, and that the Supreme Court made a fatal mistake when they allowed the Jones case to proceed, but Clinton is nonetheless still responsible for his actions to the American people. And his credibility is destroyed. Why believe that he is in fact innocent of anything else he's accused of, or anything else he says. It's true that the lies he's accused of telling are minor, but the context is not. As a result of his behavior, the nations attention has been diverted from much graver issues, over an extended period of time, completely unneccesarily. A Real Man, under the circumstances, would resign rather than put the nation through this circus.I'm not saying this would be easy, but too bad. I don't really see how shaming someone from office brings us closer to a parliamentary system. These are unusual circumstances.I believe it would be in everyones best interest if he were to step down in favor of the VP. We could then proceed to debate the merits of special prosecutors, the meaning of High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and whether or not sitting Presidents should be allowed to be sued in civil cases.I think you're dreaming if you think he'll be able to serve out his term effectively. This argument is going to be extremely rancorous and divisive, and is not something an entire nation should be forced to endure in order to save the soul of a single irresponsible and selfish man.He should step aside, which of course he won't. dave