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 (3612)	9/18/1998 3:22:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

According to a report I heard, there were over 700 instances of GJ testimony included in Lawrence Walsh's Report on Iran/Contra. As far as material "normally being under seal", remember that Starr had to obtain permission from the judge under whose purview the GJ was convened to release the supporting evidence to congress. Y You are totally missing the point. Once the material is released to Congress, they, the Congress, are under absolutely no restriction as to releasing the documents and evidence. So what would you prefer? Having selectivebits and pieces of the material made public, done of course, in a way to reflect their own personal bias. As far as the evidence gathered being "one sided and prejudicial" goes, under normal circumstance the purpose of the GJ is to see whether there is sufficient evidence to bring a person to trial for alleged crimes. Once the trial commences then there is plenty of opportunity for the defendant to mount a vigorous defense. Indeed the burden of proof falls to the prosecutor. Since we are dealing with the POTUS, the system in place to deal with potential "crimes or misdemeanors" is relegated to the Congress. They are in the process of reviewing all the material after which they will decide whether the case is made for impeachment. bp