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: Bill who wrote (5688)	9/14/1998 2:25:00 PM
From: Doughboy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13994

Vaughn: you da man! I agree nearly entirely with your assessment of Starr. He's a person who has great moral, indignant outrage, and he's a bit of a prude too. So it seemed to him that sex--no matter how irrelevant to the lying, obstruction, not to mention Whitewater--would go over well. It went over like a lead balloon. Having read these accounts, I must say that it wasn't as bad as I expected. The President exercised extreme misjudgment and stupidity, but she was a willing consensual partner, and he was the one that eventually resisted her repeated attempts to restart the affair--yes, he exercised some self-control. We're talking about a dozen sexual acts between consenting adults. Impeach? I don't think so. Beyond the overtly pornographic, salacious nature of the report, there are egregious examples of Starr trying to mock the Office of the President. At times in the report, you can tell that one of his attack dog prosecutors stuck in a dig at the President and Starr let it go. For example, there is one point where they quote Monica as saying that she got into a big fight with the President over the phone, and they quote her as saying that "he was so mad, he must have been purple." This statement had nothing to do with anything, and it was obvious that this was a malapropism that would bring a titter from the readers. It's that sort of thing thing that is entirely nappropriate and just trying to hold the Presidency out to ridicule. Also, the reference to the "hundreds of affairs" that he was alleged to have said. What does that have to do with lying and obstruction? IT'S ONLY ABOUT SEX. What about the "Northwest Gate Incident" -- which was a gossipy title for Monica simply not being allowed into the White House one day. The report says that Monica was furious because she was stood up by the President and lied to because he was meeting with Eleanor Mondale--the ex-VP's comely daughter (and, I believe, married to Keith Van Horne). What is the point of naming Mondale? Why drag someone else's name into the mud? Why leave open the suggestion that the President was carrying on a tryst with another woman. That's simply inexcusable. Having read the report, I've concluded that the President should be charged with one article of impeachment: perjury. This whole "sex is only when I do it to someone else" is stupid, and even under this definition, it's clear he did it to Monica on several occasions (i.e. stimulated her). Everything else is just window-dressing, and I think there are perfectly innocent explanations for each of them. Let it go to the Senate--and quick--so we can have a censure vote and get on with the work of governing the country. Doughboy.