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: Johannes Pilch who wrote (3455)	9/17/1998 8:46:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

I have said repeatedly that I don't think Clinton's offenses rise to a Constitutionally impeachable level. I have been complimented may times by many people for some of my more considered posts. I have also been rather strongly attacked from time to time, and perhaps sometimes with some merit, for my expressed distain for the mentality behind some of the attacks on the President. Who I acknowledge has done some nationally humiliating wrongs. But I think the most important course of action for the country is this. Decide this quickly. No one has any right to demand, or count on, the President's resigning. That easy out is not in the Constitution. And as I have argued before, he should not do so. To do so would move us closer, much, much closer to a Parliamentary system of government. Where Congress reigned supreme. This conflict, given that the prosecution (and all it's attendant investigation) has, or should be deemed to have, rested, should be amenable to quick resolution. The President's case is mostly about Constitutional standards, a bit about parsing the requirements for a criminal perjury conviction, and also about factual disputes upon cross examination. And the calling as friendly and exculpatory witnesses of some of those Starr called. Such as Vernon Jordan. And perhaps Bettie Currie. It is not from here a complex, or lengthy factual case. It should be something quickly resolvable. I also think quick resolution, HOWEVER IT MAY TURN OUT, is the most important thing for the country. I think all those who pull in the opposite direction, for delay, will be acting against the national interest. Whether they be Democrats or Republicans. A few days delay for fairness is one thing. Weeks and months of delay for whatever reason is something else. Whatever the consequences. Doug