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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2852)	9/15/1998 2:11:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Hmmmm, seems I recall somewhere that you said you weren't reading the report.....what's the matter, can't resist diving right into the "lurid details"? Give it up. Every legal analyst I've heard thus far has pointed out the necessity of the "details" to illustrate the Clinton perjury. bp

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2852)	9/15/1998 2:17:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Michelle: You're confused. That statement (I assume it comes from the text of the report) has no stand-alone subject, therefore, you did not include a fifth option: e: None of the above. I doubt you would recognize it for what it really is simply because you want to defend the indefensible, and unless you've been involved in criminal or civil legal proceedings and can cite rules of evidence that would exclude details about one person's version of events vs. another's, don't demean your own intelligence with drivel. Taking things out of context is hardly intellectually challenging. You're making this too easy.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2852)	9/15/1998 2:26:00 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I'm a conservative, I dislike Clinton immensely and I think he needs to be impeached. But I don't disagree with your point about Starr's report.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2852)	9/15/1998 2:29:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

>Tell me, what is this statement about: Monica lifted up her skirt exposing her underwear which was a g-string (graphic description of g-string follows)< Taken out of its context in this manner, the statement's meaning has been corrupted. When placed in a context wherein its original meaning is made manifest, we see it becomes evidence supporting the contention that the President was not a mannequin, as he implausibly maintains, in his sexual trysts with Miss Lewinsky. So, to use a rather boorish term, "gotcha", you non-thinking pervert supporting liberals. You are all imbeciles.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2852)	9/15/1998 4:01:00 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I see you changed your mind about reading the report. As for your analysis, I beleive Mr. Starr had to provide enough salacious detail to provide the proper framework within which to evaluate the President's actions. I can see why he was willing to commit perjury and obstruct justice. This report clearly proves his entire Presidency and his public stands on many issues are just as big a lie as the ones he told in the PJ case and repeated to the GJ. JLA