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 : Should Clinton resign? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DD™ who wrote (378)	9/15/1998 6:39:00 PM
From: jpmac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 567

>>THE FIRST LESBIAN<< You use this designation often. I gather you mean it as an insult. Do I misread? And if not, precisely what is your point? Besides, I think Sappho is commonly credited with being the first lesbian.

To: DD™ who wrote (378)	9/15/1998 7:09:00 PM
From: Les H	Respond to of 567

Starr indictments said to be imminent Prosecutor plans post-impeachment charges against Clinton, first lady By David M. Bresnahan Copyright 1998, WorldNetDaily.com Indictments of a number of people close to President Clinton are expected soon, according to sources close to the investigation of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr. Clinton will be forced to testify in a number of the trials, and his testimony will play a part in the indictments that will eventually come against him and against Hillary Clinton after they are out of the White House, the sources say. Starr hinted at his intentions in his recent report to Congress, and sources close to the investigation have confirmed that the Starr investigation has a bombshell ready to drop. Additional evidence is also being prepared for Congress, according to several sources familiar with Starr's secretive strategy. The House Judiciary Committee may be one step ahead of Starr. Committee members are reportedly discussing with each other the need to ask Starr for his evidence on Whitewater, the FBI files and the travel office firings. It is expected that Democrats will vigorously oppose such an effort to expand the inquiry into those areas. House Republicans, particularly some on the Judiciary Committee, are frustrated that Attorney General Janet Reno has not appointed an independent counsel to review campaign fund-raising abuses by the Clinton-Gore committee and the Democratic National Committee. The Justice Department is conducting a preliminary investigation, and there have been investigations in Congress for more than a year. Several Judiciary Committee members are reported to be discussing with each other the possibility of including campaign abuses within their hearings to determine if full impeachment proceedings are warranted, according to a staff member of one of the Judiciary Committee members who spoke on condition he would not be identified. David Kendall, attorney for Bill Clinton, asked in his rebuttal to the Starr report to have Clinton cleared of allegations investigated by Starr. "Despite the exhaustive nature of the OIC's investigation into the Whitewater, FBI files and travel office matters, and a constant stream of suggestions of misconduct in the media over a period of years, to this day the OIC has never exonerated the President or the first lady of wrongdoing," said Kendall in his rebuttal. "That will never happen. Judge Starr has no intention of letting those issues go," explained a source close to the Starr team. "There's a great deal about to happen," he added. Clinton is not the only one in Washington who should be worried about what Starr's plans are. "The investigation is not over, and the indictments are about to come out," said an attorney familiar with Starr's legal staff and their plans. "They've been holding back on indictments of others until they got the report to Congress taken care of. Jordan, Ickes, Carville and the gang know they will soon be indicted. Everyone in the White House is in desperation mode. They are on code red." Starr also reportedly has plenty of evidence about other women besides Monica Lewinsky. "I think he (Starr) was trying to spare the country the shock of the extent of the problem. It's not really needed for impeachment, so he left it out," claimed the source who said the full details of the many women in Clinton's life will likely be revealed in future indictments. The Starr grand jury in Virginia has been keeping very tight security on the identity of witnesses. Vans and limousines with dark windows are used to bring witnesses directly into the building so no one can see who gets out. Depositions are reported to still be under way with all the Starr grand juries. "The report to Congress did not mean an end to the depositions," said the source. The Starr report itself contains hints that more information will be provided to Congress, as well as hints that others may be indicted. It states: "From the outset, it was our strong desire to complete all phases of the investigation before deciding whether to submit to Congress information -- if any -- that may constitute grounds for an impeachment. But events and the statutory command of Section 595(c) have dictated otherwise. As the investigation into the President's actions with respect to Ms. Lewinsky and the Jones litigation progressed, it became apparent that there was a significant body of substantial and credible information that met the Section 595(c) threshold. As that phase of the investigation neared completion, it also became apparent that a delay of this Referral until the evidence from all phases of the investigation had been evaluated would be unwise. Although Section 595(c) does not specify when information must be submitted, its text strongly suggests that information of this type belongs in the hands of Congress as soon as the Independent Counsel determines that the information is reliable and substantially complete. "All phases of the investigation are now nearing completion. This Office will soon make final decisions about what steps to take, if any, with respect to the other information it has gathered. Those decisions will be made at the earliest practical time, consistent with our statutory and ethical obligations."

To: DD™ who wrote (378)	9/15/1998 7:12:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 567

The 'Lyin' King' Heads for a Maulin' in the Campaign Jungle BILL Clinton sought to repair the massive damage he has inflicted on his own party, by attending a Democratic fund-raising event yesterday in New York. But it backfired. Just three days after the report from Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel investigating presidential abuses of power, depicted Mr Clinton as a liar and reckless sexual adventurer, the President attended a Broadway performance of the Lion King, and was immediately dubbed "the Lyin' King" by critics. The Democrats need the President's money-raising skills, but his sexual exploits and admitted deceptions have destroyed the party's chances in congressional elections in November. Having hoped only two months ago that they would win a majority in the House of Representatives and trim the Republican lead in the Senate, Democratic pollsters now predict a wipe-out. All over America marginal constituencies are turning Republican. Nationwide, the party enjoys a seven-point lead over the Democrats, and forecasters suggest the Republicans could pick up 20 seats in the House and five in the Senate. This would be the third defeat President Clinton has led his party to - 1994 was a Republican landslide and 1996 a more limited defeat - and would underline the devastating impact he has had on the Democrats since 1992. "This guy has cost the Democrats three elections and now he's asking them to stand up for him," said a Republican strategist, encapsulating Mr Clinton's dilemma as he seeks support to avoid impeachment. The Republicans, meanwhile, are congratulating themselves on not overplaying their strong hand. Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Trent Lott, Republican leader in the Senate, are not calling for Mr Clinton's resignation, and are thus avoiding accusations that they are pre-empting Congress's duty to decide the matter. While the mainstream press, 89 per cent of whose reporters voted Democrat in the 1996 election, appears to be trying to stir up a "Clinton comeback" story, Republicans are determined not to let either the East Coast opinion formers or the White House turn the constitutional crisis into a partisan fight. Grover Norquist, a conservative activist said: "We don't have to push the ball forward. This ball is rolling downhill." Both parties agree that the constitutional crisis is rolling inexorably toward an impeachment vote in the House. Both sides, too, warn the President to stop splitting hairs, admit that he lied under oath, and leave Congress to decide whether this amounts to perjury or an impeachable offence. During the Clinton presidency, Republicans have gained control of Congress for the first time in half a century. The President's self-inflicted wounds are equally clear at the local level, with 70 per cent of the population, in 32 of the 50 states, now governed by Republicans. It is comparable to the Tory wipe-out in council elections during the Thatcher-Major years from 1979-97. Stuart Rothenburg, a political analyst, wrote in his newsletter recently: "We believe the President's problems tilt the playing field toward the Republicans, particularly in conservative states." He and others see the Democrats losing up to five Senate seats, which would cut them to 40 out of 100 and end their power to defeat legislation by talking about it until time runs out. This would reduce them to mere observers rather than genuine participants in the Senate. Tom Daschle, the Democratic leader in the Senate, stands by Mr Clinton only to the extent of not condemning him in advance of congressional hearings. In private he is said to be "apoplectic" about the defeat the President is inflicting on the party. Both parties' pollsters point to another major problem for Democrats. The Clinton scandals have so angered Republicans, particularly conservatives, that they are determined to vote against his party. Many Democrats, though, are so disgusted and demoralised that they may not bother voting at all. Republican turnout promises to be high, while Democrats stay at home. One pollster said: "You could put an armed guard round the polling booths and Republicans would come with their guns to cast a protest vote against Clinton."