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.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ed who wrote (10863)	9/21/1998 8:31:00 PM
From: Gerald Walls	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

I think you miss the point here. The love story between the president and his lover is a private matter , and should be resolved between the president and his family privately. Mr. Ken Starr should not involved in this investigation in the first place. By investigating , and put all the private matters into the public domain, he had violated the basic rule , that is everyone has the right to keep his privacy as long as it is not a criminal act, (this case is quite different than the case of Watergate) which include the president. Obviously you miss the point. As has been explained so many times by independent legal analysts Clinton's sex life is not the subject of the investigation. The subject of the investigation is did President Clinton commit a felony, namely perjury (which is punishable by a five year prison sentence), by lying as the defendant in a civil lawsuit against him? Since the lawsuit involved sexual misconduct and the alleged perjury involved testimony about his sexual conduct then the investigation must gather evidence that he lied about his sexual conduct. How would you suggest that the criminal investigation into perjury about his sexual conduct proceed without investigating his sexual conduct? The only ones who believe that the issue is his sexual conduct are either flailing about looking for some way to excuse the President or have been fooled by Clinton's PR machine. The moment Clinton testified in the Jones sexual misconduct lawsuit about Monica Lewinsky his conduct with her ceased to be a private matter. That there is credible evidence that he perjured himself is not a fact that can be dismissed by calling it a "private matter." Perjury cannot be a private matter. We all know that President did not commit a crime by having love story with a woman besides his wife, the worst we can say about the president is that he is not loyal to his wife, which had nothing to do whether he is a good president or a bad one. We can both agree that Clinton did not commit a crime by having a love affair, although it is possible that adultery is a criminal act in Washington D.C. Now will you agree with me that he committed a crime by perjuring himself as the defendant in a civil lawsuit?