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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: George L. Smith who wrote (17005)	9/14/1998 8:16:00 PM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 77397

Greorge, Two problems with your reasoning - the same trouble I've had with much of the discussion up to now. First even Nixon, had time review the case against him before information was released to the public. When the documentation was released he was able to also offer his perspective. Second, the documents presented by Starr are the prosecutions findings only. The condemnation the president is receiving is based only on that side of the case. It's like he's guilty until proven innocent. Even a gang member would have received more justice than the president has up to now. It's a travesty (regardless of how much of what Starr presented actually happened) that Clinton - our President - has been tried and found guilty before he has even had a chance to review the case presented by the prosecution. He is being tried by the media. Over the weekend the San Jose Mercury News called for Clinton to resign based on the Starr Report. I summarily am cancelling my subscription to that publication. This "shoot from the hip" mentality shows little thought, process, consideration, let alone compassion. OG

To: George L. Smith who wrote (17005)	9/15/1998 3:08:00 AM
From: ed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77397

If sex is private and it is not a crime, then congress should not interfere into this case in the first place, and this private matter should be settled between Clinton and his wife, then we do not have an issue whether the president is lying or not. Congress to interfere the president's private is not right at all in the very beginning. Maybe in the future it will be a crime for the president not to be a good father, or good friend of someone, and the congress will interefere everytime. The president may not be a faithful husband, however this is just a matter between himself and his wife, it is a private matter, which should be settled between him and his wife , which do not need congress to interfere at all. Not being a faithful husband is not a crime under the law, and it is not right for the congress to interfere the presiden's private matters at all in the first place. We are not elect those congressmen to investigate the president's privacy , especially his sexual life at all. Do you think it is funny that the US congress is only interested in the president's sexual life ?