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: jlallen who wrote (3965)	9/20/1998 12:38:00 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

I notice you are in favor of resignation. I prefer to test the founders' definition of an impeachable offense. I don't believe an immediate resignation would be good for the country. Is perjury, obstruction, lying to the people, and morally bankrupt behavior enough to remove a president? Or are these considered minor transgressions if the underlying issue is sex? We need to find out.

To: jlallen who wrote (3965)	9/20/1998 1:57:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

If you talk generically in terms of "sex" it doesn't sound so bad. When you see the details people will get a better idea of what kind of individual really occupies the WH. Right. Starr did the correct thing in determining bad vs good sexual behavior with regards to the Presidents affair with Monica. Where would we be as a nation without the republican moral police? Starr seems like a kind of sexual authority to me, just from looking at him I mean. Michelle