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 : THE STARR REPORT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (1154)	9/18/1998 8:35:00 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 1533

No. Mr. Starr received the Court's permission to turn the material over to Congress. Once Congress has it it may do as it pleases. JLA

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (1154)	9/18/1998 9:08:00 AM
From: j_b	Respond to of 1533

<<Well, how about publicizing grand jury hearings that were promised to be kept secret? Nothing illegal there????>> Two points here: 1. I personally don't think any of the GJ testimony should be made public, but I don't see how the impeachment hearings (if they happen) can be kept open to the public (as apparently they must be under law) if the public is not allowed to see or hear the testimony that Congress will be discussing. Give me an option and I'll consider it. 2. Apparently (according to Congressional talking heads) the secrecy rule doesn't apply since the judge gave orders releasing the information to Congress, and the Grand Jury investigation didn't result in an indictment. I'm not a lawyer and I don't pretend to understand this, but you'll note that the Democrat Congressmen and the White House are not trying to keep the video secret by claiming its release would be illegal, so it probably wouldn't be.