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: dougjn who wrote (2953)	9/15/1998 7:38:00 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Your Constitutional argument is based on a faulty premise. The founding fathers did not legislate impeachment. They left it a highly political affair defined by the whims of the time. Can Johnson's Secretary of War fight be compared to Nixon's crimes? Of course not. If good Democrat leaders like Moynihan, a constitutional scholar, say that perjury is impeachable, guess what? Hail to the Chief, President Gore.

To: dougjn who wrote (2953)	9/15/1998 7:48:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Doug - very well put. I can only say, in brevity, that it is one very considered opinion of constitutional implications and definitions of "high" crimes and misdemeanors that should be used as a basis for discussion - from the defense, of course. There are of course, other opinions, some more eloquently put than others, but it boils down to the fact that he lied. Over and over again. You are making the assumption that this particular, narrowly defined subject is somehow unique to his behavioral pattern. It is not - and although I don't think he'll be impeached for this (essentially on some of the same grounds you have laid out), I think even his strongest defenders have blinders on and that there is much more to come for which he will have very little credibility in making his own case. Mr. K.