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: MulhollandDrive who wrote (3636)	9/18/1998 3:38:00 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Betty, they want to keep the evidence secret, but then rely on the polls of citizens who haven't seen the evidence to decide on Clinton's fate.

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (3636)	9/18/1998 4:23:00 PM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<Why do you feel that the American people do not have the right and responsibility to view all the evidence and come to their own conclusions? >> The Constitution gives the responsibility to the Congress to judge this issue, not to the people. We elected our representatives (that's our input into this) and we should give them our input, but we have to trust them to handle this matter in an appropriate fashion and to come to a just solution. That's why character is so important, not just in a President, but at all levels of elected office. I don't feel we have the "right" because this was GJ testimony, given under a presumption of confidentiality. Please note that I am talking about ALL the testimony, not just the tape. I don't think the tape should be handled differently than the rest - it would be subject to the same assumption of privace. I know that other GJ has been released in the past, but I didn't agree with that either. We are losing all semblance of privacy in this nation, and I don't think we should give up our rights so lightly. <<Do we not have the right to see and hear that testimony and judge whether he was being truthful to us>> No. We are not in a legal position to judge or to have any effect on Clinton's Presidency other than to be vocal. We have to trust the people we put in office to do what we hired them to do. That's the process - let it work. What possible use is it for us to view any of the testimony, other than to either revel in the salacious and lurid detail (notice how those are the most common words in the English language now - way to go Kendall!!), or to try to paint the questioners as some modern version of the inquisition. The overwhelming majority of people already think Clinton lied under oath. This tape is unlikely to change that. Haven't we already judged whether he was being truthful?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (3636)	9/18/1998 4:26:00 PM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<The only problem with allowing Congress "only" to view the President's testimony is that there is absolutely no way to prevent one or many individual members from disseminating "select" portions of the record. >> Since both parties have access to the same material, any use of the information in the fashion you describe would be offset by the other party using other material. If that appeared to be the situation, the issue could always be revisited. Once released, the information cannot be recalled. I would rather err on the side of protecting privacy rights.