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: Doughboy who wrote (5865)	9/15/1998 3:44:00 PM
From: Joss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Hi DougHboy, If you read the Federalist Papers...High Crimes and Misdemeanors are not to be equated with Felonies and Misdemeanors...In fact...the papers clearly make the case for impeachment when the president has demeaned the office and/or due to unbecoming conduct has lost the ability to effectively govern. This was the intent of the constitutional framers...not the stuff stated by the talking heads. Steve

To: Doughboy who wrote (5865)	9/15/1998 3:45:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Respond to of 13994

No, you said there should be a different standard in how POTUS is investigated compared to say, a county sheriff. You now say you would impeach for "serious crimes or abuse of power". Obviously we would never get to that point of "discovery" following your line of thinking. Far from being specious, my argument is that this investigation of president had been conducted according to statute. Let's see, how many IC's have we had since Nixon? You say this is "unprecedented"? The only thing that has been unprecedented in this investigation has been the lengths that this administration has gone to in an effort to delay and thwart the IC's ability to get to the facts. bp

To: Doughboy who wrote (5865)	9/15/1998 6:07:00 PM
From: Rick Slemmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

I stand by my opinion that Starr, if he had any honor, would have said, "Ms. Tripp, I'm sorry, that's not the subject of my investigation, and I do not wish to pursue your allegations any further. Please stop bothering me." And what was to happen to Kathleen Willey? Just another victim of office sexual harassment. One more time: Starr was authorized by the AG and the three-judge panel to widen his investigation. Reno can fire Starr. Clinton can fire Starr. The Panel can widen or narrow the scope of the investigations. Can't you see this? When the corruption spreads from FBI files to campaign finance to sexual harassment to Chinese technology transfers to Travel Office purges, a pattern of obstruction and abuse of power is evident. I, for one, don't give a hoot about Clinton's adultery, but it seems painfully obvious that SOMETHING IS NOT QUITE RIGHT IN THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE. RS